I love me some Arcs! But definitely a Marmite game. To be fair it's one that develops with repeated plays (and the base game needs to be played with the leaders and lore cards to be fully experienced as designed, i think). There is plenty of mitigation really - hoarding resources to use for actions (psionics and relics are particularly useful), copying lead actions, seizing initiative, defending with large fleets so that intercepts can really take their toll, plus there really is a lot of negotiation in this game (I.e pleading and manipulation, begging and cajoling - which is definitely not to everyone's taste.). Also, a bit like Twilight Struggle, the more you learn the court cards and what they can do, the greater their impact on the game. I am about a dozen plays in now, and I can see the card draws becoming less and less influential - insofar as an experienced player will pretty much always beat a newbie. With regard to card counting, there is an option in the rules to avoid this, where all the cards that are played face up stay face up in a discard row so that all players can see what has been played. The really odd thing about Arcs is that the base game only came about after the campaign game was designed, which is now its expansion. And this is an entirely different beast. Massively assymetric, lots of changing roles rules and player powers, a whole political game. For me, this is the Arcs masterpiece - although I would play the base game any time as well. Amazing game but completely understand your reaction!
@@BoardGameBollocks Prelude actions are so important in allowing you to do what you need to do, so setting then up is vital. You start with some resources and you set up with cities that have access to resources, if someone else taxes, then you copy that action to tax. If you haven't got battle action cards, then focus on moving to new systems and building and improving your board position for future turns. And if you really only have a hand of influence cards then seize initiative and keep it, forcing others to waste actions to seize initiative back. When I go into a game i assume i am only going to have one action per card and likely only hold the initiative once per round (or twice if I'm lucky). I have seen quite a few games where people don't bother even trying to setup or score objectives in the first round or never set up objectives at all and just focus on competing for those other people have given up the initiative to set up. And if you have got a load of influence cards then build up majorities in the court so you can copy a secure action (or use a relic) to gain a load of trophies. If Tyrant hasn't been declared these hold over to the next chapter and you're in a great position to double declare tyrant and get a load of points. The list really does go on. Also, I really think it is important to move on to leaders and lore as soon as possible - this is really the base game - without these cards and their powers you are really just playing the tutorial game. And these cards always give you some powerful things you can lean on to achieve your goals. But look, I'm not trying to win you over, you obviously don't like it and that's fine. But I love it! And i suppose I would simply argue that the game itself is not inherently crap when for quite a few people it is genuinely their game of the year. Like a lot of Wehrle games it offers something new and distinct which is rare in a market saturated with mechanical retreads or an abundance of bling. I mean I'm not a massive fan of LSD, but i can understand why others love it (actually, no, I can't . . . )
Also, what would you consider to be a crap card draw? Low numbers? then lots of actins if you seize the initiative or surpass someone who has declared an objective. High numbers? plenty of opportunities to surpass and get the initiative. All of one type? Keep the initiative. Or build a massive fleet or generate a load of influence or gather a load of resources . . .
You are great, but can’t say i agree with all your criticisms. 1. You can mitigate your card draw with resources (which allow you to take actions unrelated to your cards) and of course by simply following (playing a card face down) - if you haven’t got the Aggression cards, someone else will. 2. Your defence in combat is the number of ships you have present which (a) make it harder for the attacker to raid (as they may roll an intercept which damages them equal to the number of defending ships) and (b) leaves the attacker vulnerable to a response. Again, you can spend resources to battle, so you aren’t entirely dependent on your cards. 3. I think the game is about building up your empire in both presence, resources and tableau cards such that the latter ambition scoring is less about luck and more about who has crafted a strong position. Love your reviews and your channel, so just a friendly counter to a few of your points - I do agree there is obviously a bit of luck baked into the game, but as with many card games it’s about learning how to work with what the game gives you. We are really loving Arcs, which seems to foster some incredibly clever and creative turns from players working the system to their advantage and haven’t felt overly hosed by the card draw. Each suit has value and if you can’t do a lot of one thing during one chapter, you can generally set yourself up for the next. Great game, could be a bit shorter though!
In answer to your criticisms of my criticisms 1. You need decent action cards to get resources. 2. Your ships don’t do anything defensive until someone else decides to attack so you don’t have any input in the decision making process. 3. You can’t build up an empire of people can randomly stroll in and steal stuff you built up. Again, you gain resources by getting the correct action cards. If you don’t you can’t get any and therefore there is no mitigation.
1. Admin cards can be used to tax, but you can play any cards face-down to copy if you don’t have any (if you don’t, someone else does). 2. In Cyclades you don’t make any decisions as the defence either. You just roll a die. I’m personally not a big fan of both attackers and defenders rolling - seems unnecessary. But ships also act as a deterrent and as blockades for travelling, so I don’t see them as superfluous or without decisions. 3. That’s what defending ships are for I guess! No problem, just passing on my experiences with the game - maybe you had a particularly wonky experience that put you off, but so far I can’t say I’ve seen the same problems. If you don’t get a lot of one type of card, you obviously get a lot of another type of card, allowing you to focus on whatever they do for a chapter. Keep your stocks up to give you added flexibility, enjoy the added powers and rule breakers from the court cards and make sure you copy suits you have fewer cards in. It’s not always easy, but I don’t think you really get that hosed either.
@ryancook1873 You can’t get court cards unless you have two different types of cards though. Cyclades is a completely different game. Not sure why you even brought that up tbh.
@@BoardGameBollocks When I have had few or no Aggression cards I use psyonics to secure. I’m trying to think if I have ever been screwed by the draw but I really don’t think I have (maybe I have just been lucky!). I recall one game in which I received a hand without Aggression cards but that meant I ended up with a lot of admin cards so I just moved and taxed a lot, using psyonics to secure cards and weapons to occasionally battle. I just sort of accepted this chapter was not going to be very battle-based and used my cards and resources to make the best of it. I don’t think you really need to a bit of everything every chapter, the suits all play into their own individual benefits and ambitions. I brought up Cyclades as I played it last night and it was the first game that sprang to mind. Different game sure, but I can’t think of any games I have played where the defence gets to make much decisions when they are attacked. To be honest I thought the fact the attacker in Arcs gets to choose their dice instead of just rolling them was a nice touch.
@ryancook1873 Problem is there’s only a max of 3 ambitions available each chapter so you can’t pull switch your strategy that easily if you draw a crap hand. “Making the best of it” isn’t a fun time…planning, mitigation and skill is.
I like Arcs a lot, but I understand why some people don't. It does require a few plays to get the hang of it. However, if you're willing to put in the time, it can be a really rewarding experience.
A lot of people talking this one up. Good to see your opinion isn't swayed by the masses "and all that You Tube bullsh*t!" Best boardgame reviews IMO;)
I have yet to play it, but i heard that you can't just think of one path to victory and expect to have good hand of cards everytime. From what i understand there is always never a perfect or good hand but the main thing is to squeeze as much from what you've been given. I don't know yet how much there is "randomness" in it exactly but from my perspective randomness just miligates going same paths everytime that are most efficient thus making the game boring really quick. Interesting to hear different opinion on this one. As always - love your content.
Great review review! The accent when you say "Bat'oles" is entertianing. My gaming group has only played twice so far. In our second game I did not get the combat cards and could not battle or take the court cards when I wanted to. I realized towards the end that taxing for missiles turns any card's pips into optional combat. So I realized that helped some. One other note: my gaming group plays several games with "card luck" involved. (terraforming mars for example.) We house ruled any game with too much card luck with a drafting system. For Arcs I would suggest you deal out 6 cards to each player, then each player takes one, passes left, takes another, passes left, etc... Then on the next round take one, pass right. This helps with TM and should also help with Arcs as well.
Chances of that card coming out and being able to secure it quickly is zero to none and if you do then the state of the game has changed so you don’t need it anymore.
Hard to remember another recent game that has been this divisive. A lot of games seem to fall into the 6 - 8 out of 10 for most people. ARCS seems to be a 1 or a 10 out of 10 for everyone.
It's got one of the most unique game designs in modern boardgames which is hugely exciting, unfortunately that design massively limits your freedom to play, instead of doing what you want to do you're limited to what the cards let you do. It can be extremely satisfying to ride that design to victory but it can also be extremely frustrating if you can't tame it.
@@BoardGameBollocks I'd be more comfortable calling it a different design, you've still got lots of choices and I don't think success is dependent on drawing the best cards. Personally I'd prefer something more freeform but I have friends who love the puzzle it presents.
I see games as a goal and a framework of limitations that you must navigate to achieve that goal. All games are limiting (you can only draw x cards, or things cost X, or you can only move 1 space, or you can only take 1 action etc). Some games more than others. Sometimes those limitations will be frustrating to some while seen as a fun puzzle for others. Vice versa, total freedom to do whatever you want will feel liberating to some and not much of a game to others. I personally like figuring out how to maximise my turn under the restrictions of a system. There are some systems I love that my friends find annoying; they want to do X but the system says no. I enjoy being presented with that problem - how can I manipulate the system so it doesn’t say no, or how can I still maximise my turn without doing X? Those are the sort of decisions I like thinking about. I can’t just do the obvious and best thing, I have to get creative. It’s like when people complain about the non-draft mode of Terraforming Mars claiming it’s too luck driven and therefore less skilful. I find being able to cherry-pick the best cards less skilful, where being limited by the draw forces you to think more deeply. If more control over the cards really did equate to a more skilful game, then it would follow that being able to just pick any cards out of the entire deck at any time would be the most skilful variant of the game - yet all that would require would be an ability to read. “How do I build the best engine with unlimited access to all the cards?” is a far less interesting question to answer than “how do I build the best engine with the cards I am given?” Horses for courses though. Sometimes a game’s limitations are just a step too far for some. Arcs doesn’t cross the line for me, but I can imagine it does for others and that’s ok. But I suspect their instinctive distaste for a restrictive system somewhat colours their ability to see ways around it and just dismiss it as a game that can completely hose you with randomness, when I really don’t think it’s the case (if it was, I wouldn’t like the game either!).
@@guyselway4865 Quite the opposite. The freedom you have in this game is unlike most other games, which is why I like it so much. Every single turn is what you make of it, and there is always some insane play that you can make to get the best out of your current situation. Every single hand you draw will be "bad" if you don't use it correctly. The only limitation is how far you can see into the future, it's kind of like you're playing Chess, but the position of each piece is randomized at the beginning of each game. There's an infinite number of new combinations that you can play with, and adapting to it is a skill you need to learn. I think the best review I've seen on the game compared it to a skateboard. If it's the first time you've ever seen one, you'd think it's a useless piece of wood that is harder to maneuver than simply running. Only through discovery can you see all the tricks you can do with it.
Interesting the thing you despise most about the game is its main tension. The entire game is about pivoting to the best thing you can do with the hand given to you. And you get better at that the more you play. Personally this game is one you want to invest time and plays into to see its full potential! Because most people complaints on it are what makes it great for others. Good video!
@@BoardGameBollocks just different strokes for different folks I guess. I quickly never felt stuck, it just stretched me to think differently. Gotta make use of those prelude actions I found!
@@BoardGameBollocks so you never once got an administration card or aggression card your entire game ? Both of those card types provide ways to get recourses. Whether from your own cities or from raiding other players.
Love your channel, always happy to hear your opinions even if they dont match with mine. One thing I'd say though, unless no one leads with an Agression card all round (unlikely) you can always copy one action off their card by playing one of your cards face down. So there is some mitigation of luck, especially if you can stockpile a few resources to combo with your card in the prelude actions. There's also guild cards that let you take a card from the play area before they're discarded if you want to make sure you definitely have an action card that you need... although I'd probably house rule that they get shuffled back into the guild deck after use rather than discarded cuz they are quite handy. I've not had much chance to play yet so maybe your frustrations will reveal themselves in time, but there's also the leaders and lore stuff which looks like it could be handy in spicing things up too... it's not for everyone, no game ever is, but it's only 50 quid so I'm not fussed if it doesn't gel with my group in the long run.
I’ve heard people say both ways on this one. Definitely hyped to the max. A friend picked it up so I’m going to give it a try. I just played John Company yesterday and thought it was pretty good but a bit lucky and too long.
I agree, I think a lot of the design really rotates around the kingmaking/players self-balancing the table to even out the randomness. It'll definitely be obnoxious to huge swaths of gamers, I still don't understand how none of the early reviews mentioned that.
@@BoardGameBollocks Ohhh was it not your account or something? I don't understand the justification on their part . . . but then again I never understand any of the decisions that occur on that site.
Totally agree... played one game of Arcs and it was one of my worst gaming experiences ever -- didn't have the option to make a single interesting decision in that entire last two hours of the game. I will never play it again.
I like the game quite a bit with Blighted Reach and Leaders & Lore - but does beg the question that if that was the intended way to play, why break it all up? I suspect because they were very stuck on the idea of releasing a "base game" that could be built on like Root and have an introductory price of $60. I will say that their customer service was really nice. My kid got the game down and didn't put it up and my Mastiff got ahold of it and mauled the box. I asked for a replacement saying I was willing to pay for it and they sent me a brand new box for free. Does that have anything to do with the game being enjoyable? No - but it is nice. It's at least easier to teach than Root. Root was super painful to teach my kids since you're teaching everyone different ways to play the game. Respect your opinion. I had purchased Too Many Bones and even though the component quality was very nice and everyone seemed to love it, I kind of didn't enjoy the game at all. Much preferred Adventure Tactics.
Me too, but it's *so* not for everyone, in particular the base game that's just a knife fight in a phone booth but every knife is randomly a rubber chicken or not.
I did not play the game so I can not tell who is (more) right. I see a lot or reviews trying to tell me this is the BEST GAME EVER. Like Tim Chuon's review, Shut up & sit Down's review, and (many?) others.
Maybe im just thick, but playing a two and half hour game to end up with zero points due to not getting the right cards at the right time was an experience I dont think I will bother repeating.
I can see your point but it feels like you pretty much ignored the primary method of removing randomness which is through prelude actions. They would seem to remove your complaint just by themselves but you also don’t seem to have made much use of the follow option so that if someone else does hold all of the aggression cards you are able to grab on to their coat tails.
You need the right action cards to get resources and guilds for prelude actions. If you get bad hands of action cards you can’t do meaningful prelude actions either. Also when you copy you only get one action. Most plays require two actions (move battle, influence, secure) so you’re stuffed even if you follow suit.
@boardgamebollocks but if you didn’t have any aggression cards and instead had ones that let you influence you either had mobilisation or administration, the latter of which lets you tax.l to get resources. If you only had mobilisation then you would probably have been better off grabbing initiative with a double card and forcing everyone else into following. You are ofc entirely allowed to not like it (not that you need my permission) but it feels like solutions might have been available to the issues you found. Either way, nice to hear a different opinion, even if it’s one I don’t agree with.
@boardgamebollocks but you can tax your own cities without control. And control itself doesn’t need aggression cards it just needs more fresh ships in a system. So I’m not sure I do see the problem. That said, your opinion is just as valid as mine and my not finding it a problem obviously doesn’t make it something you enjoyed in any event.
@Adam-pt3cb Yea if you’re lucky enough to get the cities you want from the random setup card draw. At the end of the day opinions differ and that’s fine. If everyone liked the same stuff then the world would be boring.
The freedom you have in this game is unlike most other games, which is why I like it so much. Every single turn is what you make of it, and there is always some insane play that you can make to get the best out of your current situation. Every single hand you draw will be "bad" if you don't use it correctly. The only limitation is how far you can see into the future, it's kind of like you're playing Chess, but the position of each piece is randomized at the beginning of each game. There's an infinite number of new combinations that you can play with, and adapting to it is a skill you need to learn. I think the best review I've seen on the game compared it to a skateboard. If it's the first time you've ever seen one, you'd think it's a useless piece of wood that is harder to maneuver than simply running. Only through discovery can you see all the tricks you can do with it.
It’s ok the reviewer isn’t interested in your opinion and just your engagement. He’s taking a popular game and shitting on it for the rage responses and click bait. It’s a great game and those that know how to play will play it
The comments on this one are divided, eh? All I’ll say is you helped me dodge a bullet as I was invited to sit and play this at a convention over the weekend. I was lucky enough to end up on a different table. I have some faith in your reviews.
Good video, although I don't feel the same way. It is funny to me that there are basically two ways of seeing this game: 1- "If I don't get the cards I want I'm screwed.- bad game" 2- "This game is amazing because there are so many sneaky ways to accomplish what I want to do!- Awesome game!" Every review I've seen is one of these two types.
Great review. Some designers seem to get a free pass through their careers that has baffled me. Wallace, Lacerda, Eklund, this guy. I sort of enjoyed Pax Pamir, loathed Root, and have avoided Oath and this game. Thanks for validating me … you’re adorable and I’m sure you love kittens and crochet. 😊
One of the main reasons I like boardgames over chess (I know, also technically a boardgame) is luck. I need luck because I’m too stupid to play chess. But damn, too much of a good thing it looks like.
I wonder if it has to have The Blighted Reach expansion to shine. I think I remember during the KS campaign they said the game was originally designed as both the base and the expansion but they broke it up for some reason.
The Blighted Reach expansion makes it a series of three games where everyone gets wildly asymmetric abilities, but at its heart it is still Arcs. It's going to be way worse for people who already don't enjoy the base game.
No, I saw a Werhle interview where he said in their office they've played more base game than campaign, so it is meant to be a complete experience on its own.
@@rain1224 "The game was designed initially as primarily a campaign game, and I didn’t want to present it without that mode." -Cole Wehrle on Arcs BGG Designer Diary 7 The Product Split
Arcs is my favorite board game! You do have agency in combat because you decide where your ships are defending. Also, the randomness of the cards means you have to be shrewd about what ambition you declare or let your opponents declare so that you can be positioned to score well or stop others from scoring.
There are just too many games these days where you engage with too many complex systems over...what, 5 turns? How do you plan in that kind of game? You can spend hours building up, and be torn down by circumstance in an instant. Modern board games don't even CONSIDER the concept of counter-play.
Interestingly ARCS is cited as an example of *not* doing that, as the base game (note: not Blighted Reach!!) is insanely simplistic. You selection actions, then you perform them. There's few of them, there's few ways to gain points, they're strictly competitive in nature, there's little to do than bash your head in to prevent someone from getting points of going for points themselves. There's a very strong random nature thrown into this coupled with two systems (resources and guild cards) that mitigate this randomness, and they *seemingly* add a lot of complexity but it's this... veneer almost? It's crazy simple once you get a few rounds (not even a whole game in), and plays super quick as a result. I think that's the thing that keeps the randomness frustration down for me, the game is just so damn quick for a space battle point hunting game.
@@BoardGameBollocks Oh definitely it can all fall fully apart. The few times I felt like I had bad luck I mostly just didn't think about what if I get an unbalanced hand, but rare as the super-unbalanced hands are (like well, all taxation) they do ruin your day.
Aside from Forts and Ahoy, Leder Games require players to learn divergent strategies that may take several plays to master. Most players do not wish to commit to getting thrashed for 4 games before they feel some whiff of agency.
I was surprised to learn the rules quickly, and not surprised that I haven't gotten the hang of playing well after one game. I'll reserve judgement until a few more plays of it. Right now, it seems that the problem is me, and there are better moves I can make next time. As long as the other players are learning too, it's worth playing. It definitely has enough moving parts for exploring different tactics.
This may be one of the few times we disagree. I know that I'm going to sound like a total smug knob saying this, but "you are just playing it wrong". Yes, there are some hands that, given initial setup, can be a bit of a dog's breakfast - but not drawing red isn't one of those. Get and use those damn missile resource tokens to change 2-3 of Mobilization into an absolute slaughter-fest or 2-3 of Construction to have a damage free red die rolling attack or Raid, as you can repair right after. Sometimes, you just need to burn 2 cards to get initiative, especially if one of the effects will be picking a court card letting you regain your action card - and even more when otherwise you're just watching from the sidelines. Bottom line, I think you're best reviewer, you just suck at using resources in your Prelude :D. That's literally half of the game actions. If what you have there doesn't provide mitigation, you're doing something wrong :P Resources are meant to mitigate bad/incomplete draws (Oil - no movement, Crate - no construction, Missile/Relic - no red, Psionic - no way to get control while having to do 2 things and general combo use). Also, battle doesn't give vp, if it is not scoring. Blocking ambitions is a great way to prevent combat from being meaningful - and then it doesn't matter that you have no red cards.
You need one suit to get resources and one suit to battle. The odds of only drawing the remaining 2 suits is 0.8% (1 in 125). And the fact that you can copy means even if you don't draw any of the suits you "need" then you can always just copy someone else who leads with that suit.
@justinvamp15 Copy gives you just one action. Most meaningful decisions need at least 2 actions. Move/Battle & Influence/Secure. By the time you’ve setup the 2nd action the game has changed so you can’t pull the trigger.
@@BoardGameBollocks I'm not sure what you mean with "decent action cards" unless you mean "good at the given time for the thing you want to do". After playing Bridge for 10+ years, I'm not sure if I would say 7 of Spades is better than 10 of Diamonds. It's all composition/spread based. What's better, higher numbers, lower numbers, long colours, 7/1 short, long low sequence with access? Playing like everything would be 1 pip and benefiting when it is actually more is way more reasonable than planning for pips you have, especially if you're not great at classic trick taking games - and as you get better at that part, you see there's more and more hands when you can play more of your pips. I know from my own group (most of which was actually Bridge players) that we tease each other every round by playing in a way that prevents them from doing anything of value (or at least blocking the person we are focusing on). And it doesn't require "good cards" just knowing what people want to do and leading into something they don't while trying to maintain the lead and forcing them to take bigger actions too late. This works best when players have 2-3 cards left and taking the lead by playing 2 cards is out of question. The better your trick taking game is, the stronger the cards that return a card to your hand or gain Lead are. Another thing is getting/taking lead strategically - and that means a lot in this game. It is a weird game, we can agree on this - and it does break many expectation of how those things usually work in "space games" - but the lack of options is a surface view only. To me, it is because there are few odd interlocking systems that are quite opaque to get good at at even basic level, at least in the first 10-20 games. It seems simple but it really isn't - the problem here is, that it is not obvious (or even clear at all) when the decisions you're making are bad. That's the problem. It is hard to learn from the mistakes, because the interlocking system underneath is just madly complex without looking like it is.
Pretty much all the things you hate about this game are things I like about it. But your comments about the lack of control over the hand draw have been voiced by many others and for that reason a few of my gaming mates formed a negative first impression as well. Shame because I do think this is a game that really benefits from repeat plays, but because so many people have a bad first experience, this will be a major barrier for many. For me I think is a great game.
Every game gets better with repeated plays. I usually have to Play a Game at least 2 times, until I decide what to think of it. Arcs needs at least 5 plays to mitigate the luckfest … but there are 200+ games in my collection that scream for repeated plays…
Have you tried Andromeda's Edge? I love Arcs, but a lot of my friends hate how brutal it is and have similar criticisms as you, but we all love AE. It's incredibly fun with some of the most refreshing combat I've ever experienced. It's a reimplementation of Dwellings of Eldervale, but it fixes a lot of the issues Dwellings had. I've played Arcs probably 15 times at this point and have a good time with it, but my first ~4 games were rough because I simply could not wrap my head around the card mechanics, but eventually it clicked at it made a lot of sense, but Andromeda's Edge is super quick to pick up and the Deluxe Edition is simply one of the best board games productions I've ever seen.
This review and others are the reason why I stopped watching Dice Tower. Board Game Bollocks is not afraid to tell the truthy. I massively respect that.
The opposite side of paid hype reviewers are griefers who gather more views and "likes" by constantly complaining, especially about things that is seeing large amount of praise.
So everyone's point is valid, and one needs many games to experience few good games 😅 😂 Also, it's a war game. These kind of things are a part and parcel of most war games. It's not meant for everyone to love it.
So far i like the arcs puzzle a lot and enjoy learning... So far my 3 3 player games were all close and tense. I always had one really bad hand but also some good ones or some hands played out much better than i thought. In the end my impression was that table negotiations (who is ahead and should be stopped) and good plays from opponents decided their win more then my hands... But i see the point that you could get quite unlucky which could be bad for a 2 hour+ game and i agree that you regulary have bad chapters (bad hands AND other players can ruin your live)
To counter the arguments made here. I have played this four times, I am shit at counting cards. I have won every game. So calling it a luck fest seems ridiculous to me. Examples: I had a power that gave me advantage in securing and had a hand with no secure actions. You may say I was shit out of luck. But, I looked up from my hand and saw a free relic planet. I moved to a planet with fuel used my card to tax it and boom, I had tokens that allowed me to secure. A friend had battle strength and afterwards noted he should have made sure to have weapon tokens for a situation in which he had no battle actions. You CAN mitigate, you CAN do what you want when the cards wont allow it. You have to find those opportunities on the board and when you do, its sooo satisfying. A bunch of low numbered cards isnt a death sentence, you can seize and then drop a 1 and do four things. When other players secure, you can surpass with a one and do FOUR things. Low numbered cards are gravy. High numbered cards are gravy. If you think you cant do something, I feel confident enough to say, no, you can actually. You just need to look closer. I think this is a game most people wont truly unlock until a fair few plays. And in this era, very few people will commit to that. If you want a game that slaps first time you are well catered for. If you want a game that can offer a "oooh knowing this now, changes everything" on the tenth game. Arcs.
I’ve played it a fair few times and luck mitigation is an illusion. I’m convinced Leder Games are trolling people. If you have crap card how on earth can you do what you want when it’s the cards that dictate what you can and can’t do. That’s absurd.
@@BoardGameBollocks Resources can allow you to mitigate unwanted action cards. I think the most impactful thing to not being able to do what you want to do is getting a severe beat down, that will really slow you down. Losing key guild cards, resources, and ships puts you in a terrible position. But if you can keep hold of guild cards, resources, and enough ships, it's possible to mitigate a bad card draw with what you have.
I’ve played this game 12 times, and this game will for sure fuck you at times. And sure if….IF you play all the cards right you can make something, and a lot of the times you can. BUT, every little while the game will suck. Players will steal the weapon resource you needed to declare a battle and you’re left with nothing (or the fuel, the relic, the psionic , or whatever}. This is what will keep the game back from being great.
The fact you won every game tells me the game is a luck fest. If it were not probability would suggest that other players would’ve won at least 7 of the games. Statistics don’t lie.
Yeah, it's fair. People say "Well the game is clearly not for you", well *durr*, but it still makes sense to make reviews from a disliking perspective available. SUSD explains in minute detail why you might *love* ARCS, but it's important to tell people why you might *hate* ARCS, too, in particular if you dislike strong elements of chance.
I love Arcs! It’s super swingy, and every card play can totally change the game, keeping you on the edge of your seat. You can jump into fights right from the first turn, but don’t expect a long-term strategy-it all depends on your card draws. No fight cards in hand? Then avoid combat! And don’t play it like a Euro game; it’s a wargame all about fighting, stealing, and messing with your friends.
Wow, sweariest one I think I've heard yet. I wonder if this correlates nicely with how frustrating you find a game? SOmeone do a spreadsheet! TY though, I know not to rush for this, though I don't mind luck.
The thing you are correct about is this game needs you to be smart... If you smart you can manipulate the game so with 2 captives you can win 14 points . The other thing is that you can enjoy and do allot even if it wont give you pnts... which is cool - just enjoy. To win is nice but you have so much to do if u have the brains and patience...
It just sucks they split this game. The “expansion” is the complete game. I don’t agree with this review and all the “luck” talk that is a garbage take but regardless I think the complete game is a narrative journey that the beginner base game doesn’t convey. But most reviews are on the base game so I get the negative impressions on an incomplete experience.
Cole Wehrle games have the same issues. The asymmetry and chaos mean the players have to balance the game. To do that effectively, everyone needs to understand the game state. But with so much going on, the game state is extremely difficult to parse until you have a lot of experience. The games have cool mechanics and cool themes, but you’re just pushing toys around the sandbox unless you play it repeatedly with the same players who are willing to climb that learning curve together. And I haven’t found the first 2-3 plays enough fun to warrant that kind of sustained dedication.
that's a good summarisation of the issues with those games. Everyone at the table needs to be an extremely flexible tactitian and a cut-throat schemer. Not many people enjoy backstabbing their friends at the table as a primary tool to win a game. But that's what most of their games come down to.
Man, you just articulated my toughts. I've been playing Root only and its rulebook was a complete mess. That made me not to try anymore Cole Wehrle games.
I remember hearing from every Tom, Dick & Harry that this game was the GOTY and the glazzed it with their baby batter as frequently as they damn well could as though without it, the game would just die. Having you explain it at some length, it sounds as dull as a bag of rocks, maybe I'm just fatigued with board games right now, but fuck me are most of them looking poorly made in an attempt to either look quirky and interesting, or some vain attempt to reinvent the wheel by replacing it with a depleted uranium fridge. Thanks for your honesty; I was unlikely to get this game in the first place, but it's always nice to hear you yap on about board games.
Easy to learn hard to master - love the game but it’s hard to introduce it to new players because they can feel frustrated if they don’t know how to play what they consider the weaker cards. Played two handed solo this week had an amazing time 🤤
I love your honesty with game reviews. I have to say the artwork on this game looks awful and I think Cole Wehrle is the most overrated game designer in the business right now. But then again, maybe I'm just jealous of his success :)
A non-clickbait thumbnail which is guaranteed to get clicks? Brilliant. Side note, I enjoy Arcs, but as with all games it ain't for everyone. Props to you, my guy, for sticking to your guns! Will always be a subscriber to your RUclips bullSH*T!
While I think I tolerate the game a bit better than you, I do agree that Arcs isn't anything to write home about. It's one where the group think that often infects this hobby kicked into higher gear and, for the first month or so that it was out, everyone decided that it was the greatest game that ever existed. Now that it's been out for a bit, hopefully there will be a more nuanced consensus. To me, it's a 7/10 at best.
Very interesting take. I loved this game and the wife hated it for roughly the same reasons you have set out here. Both of you are bloody wrong, you sods :D.
I have played regular and campaign ganes of arcs and i can tell ypu there is a lot you can fo to mitigate the randomness. One, use your ressources. One weapon token turns yoir 4 acrion buikd card into a 4 action battle card. Relocs can secure the cards yiu want qithout needing battke cards. Hobestly, 90% of hoir negatives can be vountered with USE YOUR RESOURCES.
First vid I've seen that is actually critical of this game. We seem to have similar tastes in games, so I appreciate this honest review. Keep 'em coming.
The fan boys of this game go to great lengths to justify what are established criticisms of other games, among them: the high randomness, low mitigation (can occur, but should be an option if they get stolen), and the game plays you (so many try to justify the poor hand draw as "git gud", but i hear it so often its obviouslyan issue). I found it dull, overly restrictive, and impossible to plan more than one turn ahead. I'd like to have seen the response to it if it were released anonymously, as then the heavy designer-bias would have been absent (both for and against).
@@BoardGameBollocks Lmao. I mean I get you have a channel and you need engagement. But when I don't like something, I don't interact with it. It's like walking into a steakhouse and complaining you don't like steak to everyone around you while you're looking at the menu.
Thank you!!! I've seen quite a few videos about this game and everytime they explain the cards bit I always feel like that could be a complete f-fest... And you said it for one! Great review, as ever!
Bloody hell, the overview of that game put me to sleep. Might give this one a miss. The effect of luck on the outcome should inversely proportional to the duration of the game.
I really enjoy this jumble of shit you seem to think it is. But fuck me right. I find the puzzle of figuring out how to do something with the hand I'm dealt to be a fun endeavor. Thanks for the video.
@@BoardGameBollocks abusing resources. And using my shit cards to change suite to keep my opponents from playing the cards it looked like they were going to use. Also I'm a lunatic so we played with leaders and lore from the get go.
These criticism come down to skill issues. Sucks to suck I guess? The game design is really tight and good for something that is nipping the heels of twilight imperium.
I love the game, but might love this review more.
This guy is what the board gaming hobby needs.
I love the camera work in this review.
👍🏻
Great to see a less overwhelmingly positive review of this game - always appreciate hearing different takes.
Great review that I happen to disagree with and doesn't affect my enjoyment. Always glad to hear your take on a game.
I love me some Arcs! But definitely a Marmite game. To be fair it's one that develops with repeated plays (and the base game needs to be played with the leaders and lore cards to be fully experienced as designed, i think). There is plenty of mitigation really - hoarding resources to use for actions (psionics and relics are particularly useful), copying lead actions, seizing initiative, defending with large fleets so that intercepts can really take their toll, plus there really is a lot of negotiation in this game (I.e pleading and manipulation, begging and cajoling - which is definitely not to everyone's taste.). Also, a bit like Twilight Struggle, the more you learn the court cards and what they can do, the greater their impact on the game. I am about a dozen plays in now, and I can see the card draws becoming less and less influential - insofar as an experienced player will pretty much always beat a newbie.
With regard to card counting, there is an option in the rules to avoid this, where all the cards that are played face up stay face up in a discard row so that all players can see what has been played.
The really odd thing about Arcs is that the base game only came about after the campaign game was designed, which is now its expansion. And this is an entirely different beast. Massively assymetric, lots of changing roles rules and player powers, a whole political game. For me, this is the Arcs masterpiece - although I would play the base game any time as well. Amazing game but completely understand your reaction!
Not sure how you can mitigate the crap card draw if you need decent cards to do the mitigations you listed 🤷♂️
@@BoardGameBollocks Prelude actions are so important in allowing you to do what you need to do, so setting then up is vital. You start with some resources and you set up with cities that have access to resources, if someone else taxes, then you copy that action to tax. If you haven't got battle action cards, then focus on moving to new systems and building and improving your board position for future turns. And if you really only have a hand of influence cards then seize initiative and keep it, forcing others to waste actions to seize initiative back.
When I go into a game i assume i am only going to have one action per card and likely only hold the initiative once per round (or twice if I'm lucky). I have seen quite a few games where people don't bother even trying to setup or score objectives in the first round or never set up objectives at all and just focus on competing for those other people have given up the initiative to set up. And if you have got a load of influence cards then build up majorities in the court so you can copy a secure action (or use a relic) to gain a load of trophies. If Tyrant hasn't been declared these hold over to the next chapter and you're in a great position to double declare tyrant and get a load of points. The list really does go on.
Also, I really think it is important to move on to leaders and lore as soon as possible - this is really the base game - without these cards and their powers you are really just playing the tutorial game. And these cards always give you some powerful things you can lean on to achieve your goals.
But look, I'm not trying to win you over, you obviously don't like it and that's fine. But I love it! And i suppose I would simply argue that the game itself is not inherently crap when for quite a few people it is genuinely their game of the year. Like a lot of Wehrle games it offers something new and distinct which is rare in a market saturated with mechanical retreads or an abundance of bling. I mean I'm not a massive fan of LSD, but i can understand why others love it (actually, no, I can't . . . )
Also, what would you consider to be a crap card draw? Low numbers? then lots of actins if you seize the initiative or surpass someone who has declared an objective. High numbers? plenty of opportunities to surpass and get the initiative. All of one type? Keep the initiative. Or build a massive fleet or generate a load of influence or gather a load of resources . . .
@billeaton6495 You need decent action cards to get prelude actions though 🤷♂️
@billeaton6495 Anything you can’t use. Which is most of the cards. Move and battle are on the same card. Influence and secure are not madness…
You are great, but can’t say i agree with all your criticisms.
1. You can mitigate your card draw with resources (which allow you to take actions unrelated to your cards) and of course by simply following (playing a card face down) - if you haven’t got the Aggression cards, someone else will.
2. Your defence in combat is the number of ships you have present which (a) make it harder for the attacker to raid (as they may roll an intercept which damages them equal to the number of defending ships) and (b) leaves the attacker vulnerable to a response. Again, you can spend resources to battle, so you aren’t entirely dependent on your cards.
3. I think the game is about building up your empire in both presence, resources and tableau cards such that the latter ambition scoring is less about luck and more about who has crafted a strong position.
Love your reviews and your channel, so just a friendly counter to a few of your points - I do agree there is obviously a bit of luck baked into the game, but as with many card games it’s about learning how to work with what the game gives you. We are really loving Arcs, which seems to foster some incredibly clever and creative turns from players working the system to their advantage and haven’t felt overly hosed by the card draw. Each suit has value and if you can’t do a lot of one thing during one chapter, you can generally set yourself up for the next.
Great game, could be a bit shorter though!
In answer to your criticisms of my criticisms
1. You need decent action cards to get resources.
2. Your ships don’t do anything defensive until someone else decides to attack so you don’t have any input in the decision making process.
3. You can’t build up an empire of people can randomly stroll in and steal stuff you built up.
Again, you gain resources by getting the correct action cards. If you don’t you can’t get any and therefore there is no mitigation.
1. Admin cards can be used to tax, but you can play any cards face-down to copy if you don’t have any (if you don’t, someone else does).
2. In Cyclades you don’t make any decisions as the defence either. You just roll a die. I’m personally not a big fan of both attackers and defenders rolling - seems unnecessary. But ships also act as a deterrent and as blockades for travelling, so I don’t see them as superfluous or without decisions.
3. That’s what defending ships are for I guess!
No problem, just passing on my experiences with the game - maybe you had a particularly wonky experience that put you off, but so far I can’t say I’ve seen the same problems. If you don’t get a lot of one type of card, you obviously get a lot of another type of card, allowing you to focus on whatever they do for a chapter. Keep your stocks up to give you added flexibility, enjoy the added powers and rule breakers from the court cards and make sure you copy suits you have fewer cards in. It’s not always easy, but I don’t think you really get that hosed either.
@ryancook1873 You can’t get court cards unless you have two different types of cards though. Cyclades is a completely different game. Not sure why you even brought that up tbh.
@@BoardGameBollocks When I have had few or no Aggression cards I use psyonics to secure. I’m trying to think if I have ever been screwed by the draw but I really don’t think I have (maybe I have just been lucky!). I recall one game in which I received a hand without Aggression cards but that meant I ended up with a lot of admin cards so I just moved and taxed a lot, using psyonics to secure cards and weapons to occasionally battle. I just sort of accepted this chapter was not going to be very battle-based and used my cards and resources to make the best of it. I don’t think you really need to a bit of everything every chapter, the suits all play into their own individual benefits and ambitions.
I brought up Cyclades as I played it last night and it was the first game that sprang to mind. Different game sure, but I can’t think of any games I have played where the defence gets to make much decisions when they are attacked. To be honest I thought the fact the attacker in Arcs gets to choose their dice instead of just rolling them was a nice touch.
@ryancook1873 Problem is there’s only a max of 3 ambitions available each chapter so you can’t pull switch your strategy that easily if you draw a crap hand. “Making the best of it” isn’t a fun time…planning, mitigation and skill is.
I like Arcs a lot, but I understand why some people don't. It does require a few plays to get the hang of it. However, if you're willing to put in the time, it can be a really rewarding experience.
I put the time in an I want my life back
A lot of people talking this one up. Good to see your opinion isn't swayed by the masses "and all that You Tube bullsh*t!" Best boardgame reviews IMO;)
A lot talking it down too. And a lot saying it’s a marmite game. IMO a lot less positive only press than a lot of other games
He definitely shared a lot of the issues with the game I mentioned in your review just after Gencon.
You know when people say 9/10 doctors recommend this?
This guy is that 1/10.
This is the best description of Arcs I have ever heard.
Phew. Thought I was the only one who didn't like this game.
I thinks it’s a great game. It’s fun and my board game group loves it :)
I have yet to play it, but i heard that you can't just think of one path to victory and expect to have good hand of cards everytime. From what i understand there is always never a perfect or good hand but the main thing is to squeeze as much from what you've been given. I don't know yet how much there is "randomness" in it exactly but from my perspective randomness just miligates going same paths everytime that are most efficient thus making the game boring really quick. Interesting to hear different opinion on this one. As always - love your content.
Great review review! The accent when you say "Bat'oles" is entertianing.
My gaming group has only played twice so far. In our second game I did not get the combat cards and could not battle or take the court cards when I wanted to. I realized towards the end that taxing for missiles turns any card's pips into optional combat. So I realized that helped some.
One other note: my gaming group plays several games with "card luck" involved. (terraforming mars for example.) We house ruled any game with too much card luck with a drafting system. For Arcs I would suggest you deal out 6 cards to each player, then each player takes one, passes left, takes another, passes left, etc... Then on the next round take one, pass right. This helps with TM and should also help with Arcs as well.
Chances of that card coming out and being able to secure it quickly is zero to none and if you do then the state of the game has changed so you don’t need it anymore.
Hard to remember another recent game that has been this divisive. A lot of games seem to fall into the 6 - 8 out of 10 for most people. ARCS seems to be a 1 or a 10 out of 10 for everyone.
It's got one of the most unique game designs in modern boardgames which is hugely exciting, unfortunately that design massively limits your freedom to play, instead of doing what you want to do you're limited to what the cards let you do.
It can be extremely satisfying to ride that design to victory but it can also be extremely frustrating if you can't tame it.
@guyselway4865 a game deliberately limiting what you want to do isn’t a unique design. It’s a poor design.
@@BoardGameBollocks I'd be more comfortable calling it a different design, you've still got lots of choices and I don't think success is dependent on drawing the best cards. Personally I'd prefer something more freeform but I have friends who love the puzzle it presents.
I see games as a goal and a framework of limitations that you must navigate to achieve that goal. All games are limiting (you can only draw x cards, or things cost X, or you can only move 1 space, or you can only take 1 action etc). Some games more than others. Sometimes those limitations will be frustrating to some while seen as a fun puzzle for others. Vice versa, total freedom to do whatever you want will feel liberating to some and not much of a game to others. I personally like figuring out how to maximise my turn under the restrictions of a system. There are some systems I love that my friends find annoying; they want to do X but the system says no. I enjoy being presented with that problem - how can I manipulate the system so it doesn’t say no, or how can I still maximise my turn without doing X? Those are the sort of decisions I like thinking about. I can’t just do the obvious and best thing, I have to get creative. It’s like when people complain about the non-draft mode of Terraforming Mars claiming it’s too luck driven and therefore less skilful. I find being able to cherry-pick the best cards less skilful, where being limited by the draw forces you to think more deeply. If more control over the cards really did equate to a more skilful game, then it would follow that being able to just pick any cards out of the entire deck at any time would be the most skilful variant of the game - yet all that would require would be an ability to read. “How do I build the best engine with unlimited access to all the cards?” is a far less interesting question to answer than “how do I build the best engine with the cards I am given?” Horses for courses though. Sometimes a game’s limitations are just a step too far for some. Arcs doesn’t cross the line for me, but I can imagine it does for others and that’s ok. But I suspect their instinctive distaste for a restrictive system somewhat colours their ability to see ways around it and just dismiss it as a game that can completely hose you with randomness, when I really don’t think it’s the case (if it was, I wouldn’t like the game either!).
@@guyselway4865 Quite the opposite. The freedom you have in this game is unlike most other games, which is why I like it so much. Every single turn is what you make of it, and there is always some insane play that you can make to get the best out of your current situation. Every single hand you draw will be "bad" if you don't use it correctly. The only limitation is how far you can see into the future, it's kind of like you're playing Chess, but the position of each piece is randomized at the beginning of each game. There's an infinite number of new combinations that you can play with, and adapting to it is a skill you need to learn.
I think the best review I've seen on the game compared it to a skateboard. If it's the first time you've ever seen one, you'd think it's a useless piece of wood that is harder to maneuver than simply running. Only through discovery can you see all the tricks you can do with it.
Interesting the thing you despise most about the game is its main tension. The entire game is about pivoting to the best thing you can do with the hand given to you. And you get better at that the more you play.
Personally this game is one you want to invest time and plays into to see its full potential! Because most people complaints on it are what makes it great for others.
Good video!
I’ve played it enough times and the results were the same…frustration at being dealt a crap hand for the state of the game at the time.
@@BoardGameBollocks just different strokes for different folks I guess. I quickly never felt stuck, it just stretched me to think differently. Gotta make use of those prelude actions I found!
@LordoftheBoard Yea, if you get the action cards that let you get the resources and cards to take the prelude actions 😂👍🏻
@@BoardGameBollocks so you never once got an administration card or aggression card your entire game ? Both of those card types provide ways to get recourses. Whether from your own cities or from raiding other players.
@LordoftheBoard yes of course but I’ve already altered my plans to accommodate the previous dud hand so I don’t need them anymore…
Love your channel, always happy to hear your opinions even if they dont match with mine. One thing I'd say though, unless no one leads with an Agression card all round (unlikely) you can always copy one action off their card by playing one of your cards face down. So there is some mitigation of luck, especially if you can stockpile a few resources to combo with your card in the prelude actions. There's also guild cards that let you take a card from the play area before they're discarded if you want to make sure you definitely have an action card that you need... although I'd probably house rule that they get shuffled back into the guild deck after use rather than discarded cuz they are quite handy.
I've not had much chance to play yet so maybe your frustrations will reveal themselves in time, but there's also the leaders and lore stuff which looks like it could be handy in spicing things up too... it's not for everyone, no game ever is, but it's only 50 quid so I'm not fussed if it doesn't gel with my group in the long run.
I did NOT expect a yoghurt joke 😄..
Bless ya ..👌🍻
Nice work, like always. 👊
When Dune: Imperium - Uprising? 🤔
Prob never. Too similar to the game I already own.
I’ve heard people say both ways on this one. Definitely hyped to the max. A friend picked it up so I’m going to give it a try. I just played John Company yesterday and thought it was pretty good but a bit lucky and too long.
Couldn't agree with you more on this one...
I agree, I think a lot of the design really rotates around the kingmaking/players self-balancing the table to even out the randomness. It'll definitely be obnoxious to huge swaths of gamers, I still don't understand how none of the early reviews mentioned that.
Over hyped.
I feel the same hype with Heat.
@@paullumsden6093Have you played it?
Did you remove your review on BGG or did the mods get it?
Mods got hold of it and deleted the account that posted it
@@BoardGameBollocks So the "board game maffia" is real then.
Absolutely…
@@BoardGameBollocks Ohhh was it not your account or something? I don't understand the justification on their part . . . but then again I never understand any of the decisions that occur on that site.
@TabletopTurtle no. I got banned ages ago so a mate of mine started adding links. They got banned now too. What a bunch of twats 😂
Totally agree... played one game of Arcs and it was one of my worst gaming experiences ever -- didn't have the option to make a single interesting decision in that entire last two hours of the game. I will never play it again.
I like the game quite a bit with Blighted Reach and Leaders & Lore - but does beg the question that if that was the intended way to play, why break it all up? I suspect because they were very stuck on the idea of releasing a "base game" that could be built on like Root and have an introductory price of $60. I will say that their customer service was really nice. My kid got the game down and didn't put it up and my Mastiff got ahold of it and mauled the box. I asked for a replacement saying I was willing to pay for it and they sent me a brand new box for free. Does that have anything to do with the game being enjoyable? No - but it is nice. It's at least easier to teach than Root. Root was super painful to teach my kids since you're teaching everyone different ways to play the game. Respect your opinion. I had purchased Too Many Bones and even though the component quality was very nice and everyone seemed to love it, I kind of didn't enjoy the game at all. Much preferred Adventure Tactics.
Adventure tactics kicks major butt. My kid digs it too
I like this game. Definitely not for everyone.
Me too, but it's *so* not for everyone, in particular the base game that's just a knife fight in a phone booth but every knife is randomly a rubber chicken or not.
I did not play the game so I can not tell who is (more) right. I see a lot or reviews trying to tell me this is the BEST GAME EVER. Like Tim Chuon's review, Shut up & sit Down's review, and (many?) others.
It’s not the worst game ever but it’s deffo not the best…
Maybe im just thick, but playing a two and half hour game to end up with zero points due to not getting the right cards at the right time was an experience I dont think I will bother repeating.
Juxtapose this with the Orleans game we had the week before and the fun factor is night and day…
I can see your point but it feels like you pretty much ignored the primary method of removing randomness which is through prelude actions. They would seem to remove your complaint just by themselves but you also don’t seem to have made much use of the follow option so that if someone else does hold all of the aggression cards you are able to grab on to their coat tails.
You need the right action cards to get resources and guilds for prelude actions. If you get bad hands of action cards you can’t do meaningful prelude actions either.
Also when you copy you only get one action. Most plays require two actions (move battle, influence, secure) so you’re stuffed even if you follow suit.
@boardgamebollocks but if you didn’t have any aggression cards and instead had ones that let you influence you either had mobilisation or administration, the latter of which lets you tax.l to get resources.
If you only had mobilisation then you would probably have been better off grabbing initiative with a double card and forcing everyone else into following.
You are ofc entirely allowed to not like it (not that you need my permission) but it feels like solutions might have been available to the issues you found.
Either way, nice to hear a different opinion, even if it’s one I don’t agree with.
@Adam-pt3cb you can only tax if you setup control of that planet so you need the right action cards to do it…you see the issue here now?
@boardgamebollocks but you can tax your own cities without control. And control itself doesn’t need aggression cards it just needs more fresh ships in a system. So I’m not sure I do see the problem. That said, your opinion is just as valid as mine and my not finding it a problem obviously doesn’t make it something you enjoyed in any event.
@Adam-pt3cb Yea if you’re lucky enough to get the cities you want from the random setup card draw. At the end of the day opinions differ and that’s fine. If everyone liked the same stuff then the world would be boring.
I am just decorating my kalax with Kyle Ferrin art 😂
Once my wife asked me why I was in such a bad mood - I just answered that I played Root 😂
The freedom you have in this game is unlike most other games, which is why I like it so much. Every single turn is what you make of it, and there is always some insane play that you can make to get the best out of your current situation. Every single hand you draw will be "bad" if you don't use it correctly. The only limitation is how far you can see into the future, it's kind of like you're playing Chess, but the position of each piece is randomized at the beginning of each game. There's an infinite number of new combinations that you can play with, and adapting to it is a skill you need to learn.
I think the best review I've seen on the game compared it to a skateboard. If it's the first time you've ever seen one, you'd think it's a useless piece of wood that is harder to maneuver than simply running. Only through discovery can you see all the tricks you can do with it.
It’s ok the reviewer isn’t interested in your opinion and just your engagement. He’s taking a popular game and shitting on it for the rage responses and click bait. It’s a great game and those that know how to play will play it
@@JustTheTrick Yeah, I do get the feeling that he's just a rage-baiting grifter...
When are you two trolls going to suck each other off? ✊🏻💦
Hmmm interesting take. Never played the game, but I do like seeing different thoughts on the game
Favourite board game review site. Keep up the good work!
The comments on this one are divided, eh?
All I’ll say is you helped me dodge a bullet as I was invited to sit and play this at a convention over the weekend. I was lucky enough to end up on a different table.
I have some faith in your reviews.
Finally an honest and realistic review. For once I don't get the hype around the game. Not my cup of tee at all
Best board game channel on youtube
Good video, although I don't feel the same way.
It is funny to me that there are basically two ways of seeing this game:
1- "If I don't get the cards I want I'm screwed.- bad game"
2- "This game is amazing because there are so many sneaky ways to accomplish what I want to do!- Awesome game!"
Every review I've seen is one of these two types.
Great review. Some designers seem to get a free pass through their careers that has baffled me. Wallace, Lacerda, Eklund, this guy. I sort of enjoyed Pax Pamir, loathed Root, and have avoided Oath and this game. Thanks for validating me … you’re adorable and I’m sure you love kittens and crochet. 😊
High Frontier 4 all is pretty decent and Brass is a good one. Never been a lacerda fan and all leder games I’ve played have sucked.
I bought arcs all in kickstarter. Can’t get it to the table. Just feels overwhelming
Core games is quite simple. Start there innit…
One of the main reasons I like boardgames over chess (I know, also technically a boardgame) is luck. I need luck because I’m too stupid to play chess. But damn, too much of a good thing it looks like.
Chess is a memory game
I wonder if it has to have The Blighted Reach expansion to shine. I think I remember during the KS campaign they said the game was originally designed as both the base and the expansion but they broke it up for some reason.
Well that was a dumb thing to do…
The Blighted Reach expansion makes it a series of three games where everyone gets wildly asymmetric abilities, but at its heart it is still Arcs.
It's going to be way worse for people who already don't enjoy the base game.
Proably cost. The campaign box is bigger then the base box
No, I saw a Werhle interview where he said in their office they've played more base game than campaign, so it is meant to be a complete experience on its own.
@@rain1224 "The game was designed initially as primarily a campaign game, and I didn’t want to present it without that mode." -Cole Wehrle on Arcs BGG Designer Diary 7 The Product Split
Arcs is my favorite board game!
You do have agency in combat because you decide where your ships are defending.
Also, the randomness of the cards means you have to be shrewd about what ambition you declare or let your opponents declare so that you can be positioned to score well or stop others from scoring.
Defending isn’t combat until the attacker decides. Noting to do with your ship placement.
There are just too many games these days where you engage with too many complex systems over...what, 5 turns? How do you plan in that kind of game? You can spend hours building up, and be torn down by circumstance in an instant. Modern board games don't even CONSIDER the concept of counter-play.
Interestingly ARCS is cited as an example of *not* doing that, as the base game (note: not Blighted Reach!!) is insanely simplistic. You selection actions, then you perform them. There's few of them, there's few ways to gain points, they're strictly competitive in nature, there's little to do than bash your head in to prevent someone from getting points of going for points themselves.
There's a very strong random nature thrown into this coupled with two systems (resources and guild cards) that mitigate this randomness, and they *seemingly* add a lot of complexity but it's this... veneer almost? It's crazy simple once you get a few rounds (not even a whole game in), and plays super quick as a result. I think that's the thing that keeps the randomness frustration down for me, the game is just so damn quick for a space battle point hunting game.
@Carighan You need decent action cards to get guild and resources…crap action cards = no guild or resources
@@BoardGameBollocks Oh definitely it can all fall fully apart. The few times I felt like I had bad luck I mostly just didn't think about what if I get an unbalanced hand, but rare as the super-unbalanced hands are (like well, all taxation) they do ruin your day.
@BoardGameBollocks - I'm starting to think that if you ran into Cole Wehrle in a dark alley, you'd want to throw hands. :D
I’m sure he’s a nice person…just makes crap games
I think he's reserving those special honours for Eric Lang XD
Aside from Forts and Ahoy, Leder Games require players to learn divergent strategies that may take several plays to master. Most players do not wish to commit to getting thrashed for 4 games before they feel some whiff of agency.
I’ve played most of their games several times and by and large they all suck
I was surprised to learn the rules quickly, and not surprised that I haven't gotten the hang of playing well after one game. I'll reserve judgement until a few more plays of it. Right now, it seems that the problem is me, and there are better moves I can make next time. As long as the other players are learning too, it's worth playing. It definitely has enough moving parts for exploring different tactics.
Same applies to all games mate.
@@BoardGameBollocks Not Great Western Trail. That one can disappear for all I care.
This may be one of the few times we disagree. I know that I'm going to sound like a total smug knob saying this, but "you are just playing it wrong". Yes, there are some hands that, given initial setup, can be a bit of a dog's breakfast - but not drawing red isn't one of those. Get and use those damn missile resource tokens to change 2-3 of Mobilization into an absolute slaughter-fest or 2-3 of Construction to have a damage free red die rolling attack or Raid, as you can repair right after. Sometimes, you just need to burn 2 cards to get initiative, especially if one of the effects will be picking a court card letting you regain your action card - and even more when otherwise you're just watching from the sidelines.
Bottom line, I think you're best reviewer, you just suck at using resources in your Prelude :D. That's literally half of the game actions. If what you have there doesn't provide mitigation, you're doing something wrong :P Resources are meant to mitigate bad/incomplete draws (Oil - no movement, Crate - no construction, Missile/Relic - no red, Psionic - no way to get control while having to do 2 things and general combo use).
Also, battle doesn't give vp, if it is not scoring. Blocking ambitions is a great way to prevent combat from being meaningful - and then it doesn't matter that you have no red cards.
You need decent action cards to get the middle resource tokens. By the time you get them chances are you don’t need them anymore.
You need one suit to get resources and one suit to battle. The odds of only drawing the remaining 2 suits is 0.8% (1 in 125). And the fact that you can copy means even if you don't draw any of the suits you "need" then you can always just copy someone else who leads with that suit.
@justinvamp15 Copy gives you just one action. Most meaningful decisions need at least 2 actions. Move/Battle & Influence/Secure. By the time you’ve setup the 2nd action the game has changed so you can’t pull the trigger.
@@BoardGameBollocks I'm not sure what you mean with "decent action cards" unless you mean "good at the given time for the thing you want to do". After playing Bridge for 10+ years, I'm not sure if I would say 7 of Spades is better than 10 of Diamonds. It's all composition/spread based. What's better, higher numbers, lower numbers, long colours, 7/1 short, long low sequence with access?
Playing like everything would be 1 pip and benefiting when it is actually more is way more reasonable than planning for pips you have, especially if you're not great at classic trick taking games - and as you get better at that part, you see there's more and more hands when you can play more of your pips. I know from my own group (most of which was actually Bridge players) that we tease each other every round by playing in a way that prevents them from doing anything of value (or at least blocking the person we are focusing on). And it doesn't require "good cards" just knowing what people want to do and leading into something they don't while trying to maintain the lead and forcing them to take bigger actions too late. This works best when players have 2-3 cards left and taking the lead by playing 2 cards is out of question. The better your trick taking game is, the stronger the cards that return a card to your hand or gain Lead are. Another thing is getting/taking lead strategically - and that means a lot in this game.
It is a weird game, we can agree on this - and it does break many expectation of how those things usually work in "space games" - but the lack of options is a surface view only. To me, it is because there are few odd interlocking systems that are quite opaque to get good at at even basic level, at least in the first 10-20 games. It seems simple but it really isn't - the problem here is, that it is not obvious (or even clear at all) when the decisions you're making are bad. That's the problem. It is hard to learn from the mistakes, because the interlocking system underneath is just madly complex without looking like it is.
@AllinWhenPlaying you can’t “get good” at something if you’re constantly given poor cards in a random draw.
Wow. I disagree, but I always respect your opinions. Great review, mate. But, I'm still buying a copy. 😂
Pretty much all the things you hate about this game are things I like about it.
But your comments about the lack of control over the hand draw have been voiced by many others and for that reason a few of my gaming mates formed a negative first impression as well.
Shame because I do think this is a game that really benefits from repeat plays, but because so many people have a bad first experience, this will be a major barrier for many.
For me I think is a great game.
I’ve played it enough to know it’s not for me…have fun with it
Every game gets better with repeated plays. I usually have to Play a Game at least 2 times, until I decide what to think of it.
Arcs needs at least 5 plays to mitigate the luckfest … but there are 200+ games in my collection that scream for repeated plays…
I read some gamers said that Arcs is the GOTY. 😅
Have you tried Andromeda's Edge? I love Arcs, but a lot of my friends hate how brutal it is and have similar criticisms as you, but we all love AE.
It's incredibly fun with some of the most refreshing combat I've ever experienced. It's a reimplementation of Dwellings of Eldervale, but it fixes a lot of the issues Dwellings had.
I've played Arcs probably 15 times at this point and have a good time with it, but my first ~4 games were rough because I simply could not wrap my head around the card mechanics, but eventually it clicked at it made a lot of sense, but Andromeda's Edge is super quick to pick up and the Deluxe Edition is simply one of the best board games productions I've ever seen.
My fav and 'plain direct' ARCS review 😂
This review and others are the reason why I stopped watching Dice Tower. Board Game Bollocks is not afraid to tell the truthy. I massively respect that.
But what if they genuinely enjoyed the game? I thought it was pretty damn good.
Or that you finally realized your interests don't align with the DT. Your logic is broken
The opposite side of paid hype reviewers are griefers who gather more views and "likes" by constantly complaining, especially about things that is seeing large amount of praise.
why do you think tht the dice tower aren't telling the truth? because they liked the game?
Truth is something that aligns with their taste.
Finally somebody that puts some criticism against the ridiculous "Arcs" hype.
So everyone's point is valid, and one needs many games to experience few good games 😅 😂
Also, it's a war game. These kind of things are a part and parcel of most war games.
It's not meant for everyone to love it.
Whoops,,, I just brought this thing today.
You may like it. Who knows…
So far i like the arcs puzzle a lot and enjoy learning... So far my 3 3 player games were all close and tense. I always had one really bad hand but also some good ones or some hands played out much better than i thought. In the end my impression was that table negotiations (who is ahead and should be stopped) and good plays from opponents decided their win more then my hands... But i see the point that you could get quite unlucky which could be bad for a 2 hour+ game and i agree that you regulary have bad chapters (bad hands AND other players can ruin your live)
As always, excellent overview and review!
To counter the arguments made here. I have played this four times, I am shit at counting cards. I have won every game. So calling it a luck fest seems ridiculous to me.
Examples: I had a power that gave me advantage in securing and had a hand with no secure actions. You may say I was shit out of luck. But, I looked up from my hand and saw a free relic planet. I moved to a planet with fuel used my card to tax it and boom, I had tokens that allowed me to secure. A friend had battle strength and afterwards noted he should have made sure to have weapon tokens for a situation in which he had no battle actions. You CAN mitigate, you CAN do what you want when the cards wont allow it. You have to find those opportunities on the board and when you do, its sooo satisfying. A bunch of low numbered cards isnt a death sentence, you can seize and then drop a 1 and do four things. When other players secure, you can surpass with a one and do FOUR things. Low numbered cards are gravy. High numbered cards are gravy. If you think you cant do something, I feel confident enough to say, no, you can actually. You just need to look closer.
I think this is a game most people wont truly unlock until a fair few plays. And in this era, very few people will commit to that. If you want a game that slaps first time you are well catered for. If you want a game that can offer a "oooh knowing this now, changes everything" on the tenth game. Arcs.
I’ve played it a fair few times and luck mitigation is an illusion. I’m convinced Leder Games are trolling people.
If you have crap card how on earth can you do what you want when it’s the cards that dictate what you can and can’t do. That’s absurd.
@@BoardGameBollocks Resources can allow you to mitigate unwanted action cards. I think the most impactful thing to not being able to do what you want to do is getting a severe beat down, that will really slow you down. Losing key guild cards, resources, and ships puts you in a terrible position. But if you can keep hold of guild cards, resources, and enough ships, it's possible to mitigate a bad card draw with what you have.
@tiford184 That’s great if you have the cards to get the resources and don’t get them nicked just after you go them…you see the problem here?
I’ve played this game 12 times, and this game will for sure fuck you at times. And sure if….IF you play all the cards right you can make something, and a lot of the times you can. BUT, every little while the game will suck. Players will steal the weapon resource you needed to declare a battle and you’re left with nothing (or the fuel, the relic, the psionic , or whatever}. This is what will keep the game back from being great.
The fact you won every game tells me the game is a luck fest. If it were not probability would suggest that other players would’ve won at least 7 of the games. Statistics don’t lie.
Played it once, will never play it again.
Really love your honesty. Thank you.
Honestly is not determined by a negative reaction or positive. But could be a lie. Not sayinghe isn't honest. But important perspective to remember.
Yeah, it's fair. People say "Well the game is clearly not for you", well *durr*, but it still makes sense to make reviews from a disliking perspective available. SUSD explains in minute detail why you might *love* ARCS, but it's important to tell people why you might *hate* ARCS, too, in particular if you dislike strong elements of chance.
I love Arcs! It’s super swingy, and every card play can totally change the game, keeping you on the edge of your seat. You can jump into fights right from the first turn, but don’t expect a long-term strategy-it all depends on your card draws. No fight cards in hand? Then avoid combat! And don’t play it like a Euro game; it’s a wargame all about fighting, stealing, and messing with your friends.
Wow, sweariest one I think I've heard yet. I wonder if this correlates nicely with how frustrating you find a game? SOmeone do a spreadsheet! TY though, I know not to rush for this, though I don't mind luck.
Finally, a review of this game I completely agree with.
LOVE YOUR INTRO BRO
The thing you are correct about is this game needs you to be smart... If you smart you can manipulate the game so with 2 captives you can win 14 points . The other thing is that you can enjoy and do allot even if it wont give you pnts... which is cool - just enjoy. To win is nice but you have so much to do if u have the brains and patience...
yea yea yea yea yea yea
It just sucks they split this game. The “expansion” is the complete game. I don’t agree with this review and all the “luck” talk that is a garbage take but regardless I think the complete game is a narrative journey that the beginner base game doesn’t convey. But most reviews are on the base game so I get the negative impressions on an incomplete experience.
Cole Wehrle games have the same issues. The asymmetry and chaos mean the players have to balance the game. To do that effectively, everyone needs to understand the game state. But with so much going on, the game state is extremely difficult to parse until you have a lot of experience.
The games have cool mechanics and cool themes, but you’re just pushing toys around the sandbox unless you play it repeatedly with the same players who are willing to climb that learning curve together. And I haven’t found the first 2-3 plays enough fun to warrant that kind of sustained dedication.
that's a good summarisation of the issues with those games.
Everyone at the table needs to be an extremely flexible tactitian and a cut-throat schemer.
Not many people enjoy backstabbing their friends at the table as a primary tool to win a game. But that's what most of their games come down to.
@FalkFlak ARCs is only a backstabbing game if you get the action cards that allow you to do that.
Man, you just articulated my toughts. I've been playing Root only and its rulebook was a complete mess. That made me not to try anymore Cole Wehrle games.
Fun. Informative. I like. 👍
I remember hearing from every Tom, Dick & Harry that this game was the GOTY and the glazzed it with their baby batter as frequently as they damn well could as though without it, the game would just die.
Having you explain it at some length, it sounds as dull as a bag of rocks, maybe I'm just fatigued with board games right now, but fuck me are most of them looking poorly made in an attempt to either look quirky and interesting, or some vain attempt to reinvent the wheel by replacing it with a depleted uranium fridge.
Thanks for your honesty; I was unlikely to get this game in the first place, but it's always nice to hear you yap on about board games.
My yogurt is so nicked!!
Easy to learn hard to master - love the game but it’s hard to introduce it to new players because they can feel frustrated if they don’t know how to play what they consider the weaker cards. Played two handed solo this week had an amazing time 🤤
I sold my copy.....too much "take that"....too long to play and in the end just didn't feel like I had fun...even if I won.
Can you step back from the camera ? We could see more of your gesture and or artwork around your basement 👍
I’m in a tiny room so no sorry
I love your honesty with game reviews. I have to say the artwork on this game looks awful and I think Cole Wehrle is the most overrated game designer in the business right now. But then again, maybe I'm just jealous of his success :)
A non-clickbait thumbnail which is guaranteed to get clicks? Brilliant.
Side note, I enjoy Arcs, but as with all games it ain't for everyone. Props to you, my guy, for sticking to your guns! Will always be a subscriber to your RUclips bullSH*T!
While I think I tolerate the game a bit better than you, I do agree that Arcs isn't anything to write home about. It's one where the group think that often infects this hobby kicked into higher gear and, for the first month or so that it was out, everyone decided that it was the greatest game that ever existed. Now that it's been out for a bit, hopefully there will be a more nuanced consensus. To me, it's a 7/10 at best.
Rather good summation Mr B. I think fair and helpful. Je suis Bollocks.
Another guys on a map game, with arbitrary hoops to jump through to achieve anything. Fell very very flat wit us.
Couldn't agree more.
It sucks cause i cannot even listen to the rules
Very interesting take. I loved this game and the wife hated it for roughly the same reasons you have set out here. Both of you are bloody wrong, you sods :D.
😂👍🏻
Same guy as Pax Pamir??
Yea and root…
Easy pass then
I'm curious about your opinion on John Company 2nd edition, if you plan to review it in the future.
I'm curious about your opinion on John Company 2nd edition, if you plan to review it in the future.
I have played regular and campaign ganes of arcs and i can tell ypu there is a lot you can fo to mitigate the randomness.
One, use your ressources. One weapon token turns yoir 4 acrion buikd card into a 4 action battle card.
Relocs can secure the cards yiu want qithout needing battke cards.
Hobestly, 90% of hoir negatives can be vountered with USE YOUR RESOURCES.
You need decent action card to get resources and relic cards.
You can’t use resources if you can secure them. Good grief man…
You can copy even if you don't have the "right" suits
First vid I've seen that is actually critical of this game. We seem to have similar tastes in games, so I appreciate this honest review. Keep 'em coming.
@@JoeTheGons quackelope also didn't like it
@@TabletopFamily Nice shout. I'll have to check his channel.
Quality. I finally have some evidence to support my wholly unwarranted dislike for this game ;)
l think you just don’t like Cole Wehrle mate
You think?
The fan boys of this game go to great lengths to justify what are established criticisms of other games, among them: the high randomness, low mitigation (can occur, but should be an option if they get stolen), and the game plays you (so many try to justify the poor hand draw as "git gud", but i hear it so often its obviouslyan issue). I found it dull, overly restrictive, and impossible to plan more than one turn ahead.
I'd like to have seen the response to it if it were released anonymously, as then the heavy designer-bias would have been absent (both for and against).
You just don't like Cole Werhle games
Thanks for stating the obvious to the world 👍🏻
@@BoardGameBollocks Lmao. I mean I get you have a channel and you need engagement. But when I don't like something, I don't interact with it. It's like walking into a steakhouse and complaining you don't like steak to everyone around you while you're looking at the menu.
@mreed7947 If you review games in a public space then it’s your duty to tear them a new arsehole before talking crap about them.
Thank you!!! I've seen quite a few videos about this game and everytime they explain the cards bit I always feel like that could be a complete f-fest... And you said it for one! Great review, as ever!
Dude...going to call foul on this one. I'm definitely on team ARCS and all that BS.
Bloody hell, the overview of that game put me to sleep. Might give this one a miss.
The effect of luck on the outcome should inversely proportional to the duration of the game.
You lost me after playing the 2nd card...
I really enjoy this jumble of shit you seem to think it is. But fuck me right. I find the puzzle of figuring out how to do something with the hand I'm dealt to be a fun endeavor. Thanks for the video.
How did you figure out how to polish the turd you were dealt 5 times?
@@BoardGameBollocks abusing resources. And using my shit cards to change suite to keep my opponents from playing the cards it looked like they were going to use. Also I'm a lunatic so we played with leaders and lore from the get go.
Give me Captain Flip over this any day of the week!
that game is so damn simple yet so good
Less chance in that one, too. Then again, Yahtzee and Roulette are less reliant on chance than ARCS. :P
More artificial industry hype
How many more times must we suffer the same hype train bullcrap?
These criticism come down to skill issues. Sucks to suck I guess?
The game design is really tight and good for something that is nipping the heels of twilight imperium.
Played it for the first time this week and I have to say I agree. I didn't like it at all.
Well, that settles it, when people are happy of negative/critical reviews existing, you gotta buy that game
Speak English.
Hahhahaha love you bro.
Yea?