Episode 16 - The Crew: The Quest for Planet Nine - Adventures Around Uranus

Thanks for joining us for another episode of Board With Each Other!

This month is another first as we tackle a game that is specifically not meant for 2 players and see how well it works with the included two player variant, the big game in a little box that is The Crew. We also look at the game in a more general fashion and weigh up the benefits of a talking ban. 

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:15

Hello everybody and welcome back to another episode of Board with Each Other, the board gaming podcast that reviews games through a two-player lens, whether that's playing with your partner, significant other, a really good friend, or that crewmate on the ship that just cannot be relied upon for anything and keeps breaking equipment. I'm Al Simpson, and I'm joined today, as ever, by my lovely co-host and wife, Hannah Kelly.

SPEAKER_03 0:41

Hi guys.

SPEAKER_00 0:42

And today we are reviewing the crew. Colon, the quest for Planet Nine. The crew The Quest for Planet Nine, I'm not going to use its full title the entire way through because there are two games in the crew series, as far as I know, to this point, is a cooperative trick-taking game where you uh take on the roles of astronauts in the quest for a ninth planet in our solar system.

SPEAKER_03 1:07

Not Uranus.

SPEAKER_00 1:09

Uh no, but Uranus is mentioned quite a lot to the point that I think that actually lent into it a little bit, but anyway, we'll get to that.

SPEAKER_03 1:14

Pluto's ninth planet. That's the one that's been axed.

SPEAKER_00 1:17

No, no, no, no. Uh Pluto is the ninth planet. I don't actually know. That's embarrassing. No, I'm pretty sure in the the the narrative of this, Pluto is classed as a planet, so maybe it's the extra one. As a geek, and I don't know how many planets there are in the solar system, I've forgotten. That's really embarrassing. No, no. Well, I am a little bit, but apparently not for the solar system anymore. Um so as I said, you take the role of astronauts, and to achieve your quest, you play through a series of 50 scenarios, um, and you basically have to take tricks in accordance with the scenario, what the scenario tasks you with doing. Um, for those uninitiated in trick-taking, trick-taking basically means every player puts down a card of a suit and the highest numbered uh card of that suit wins the trick. The tricky thing about the crew is you have to win tricks dependent on task cards that are handed out at the start of the scenario.

SPEAKER_03 2:14

And randomly assigned.

SPEAKER_00 2:15

And randomly assigned. So in a very simple term, for example, you'd have three task cards in one of the early scenarios. If you're playing three players, you get one each. And on that uh task card will be a card and a suit. Basically, you have to win that suit to complete the you have to win that trick containing that card to win the to to complete the task. So that that card could be somebody else put it down in the trick, or it could be yourself, it doesn't really matter. As long as you win the trick that that card was was within, you basically complete that task. The tasks start out very, very simple, where you've just got a number of task cards that you have to complete. But as the scenarios progress, you have much more complicated scenarios laid out before you. So it could be you have a series of task cards that have to be done in a certain order, or you get quite unusual ones where certain people have to win in sort of like an even number of tricks and you have to go through the whole deck, um, or the commander has to the commander is the the first player essentially, um, that has to win uh the first or the last trick, for example, and the complexity ramps up as you go through. So each scenario tends to add more conditions or more task cards up until right at the end, where I think the you you get up to nine or ten. The crew is designed to be played by three to five players. Um, it is not a game that has been designed with two players in mind, and we've got quite a lot to say about that.

SPEAKER_03 3:42

But there is a variant that comes within the box that allows you to play as two, where you have a dummy third player, the AI, Jarvis, and at the start of the game, Jarvis is dealt uh seven cards face down, and then on top of those face down cards, you deal with seven cards face up. Once you've played the face up card, you then turn over the card that was beneath it, so you begin to cycle through his hands.

SPEAKER_00 4:09

Yeah. And the player who's the commander, who has there's a series of four cards, which are Trump cards, rockets. Whoever has the four rockets, which can't be Jarvis, this will be one of the two other two players, takes on the role of the commander. That's the same in two and three plus games. And the commander, when you're playing as two, takes the role of Jarvis as well, so you decide which cards to play. Um, you cannot communicate during the game about your hand or about cards or about strategy at all. All you're allowed to do is each player has a communication marker.

SPEAKER_03 4:41

Which was not always available. Some scenarios it's not available.

SPEAKER_00 4:46

And with that communication marker, you can place at any time, doesn't have to be your turn, you can place down a card, and you can place the marker on the top, which means this is the highest value card of that suit you have, at the bottom, which means it's the lowest, or in the middle, which means it's the only. You can only do that once per game.

SPEAKER_03 5:03

If at all.

SPEAKER_00 5:04

If yeah, if at all, if the scenario allows you to. You have some scenarios that don't allow you to do that until sort of the third or fourth trick has been won. You have some where you can communicate, but you can only communicate by placing down a card. You your the meaning of that card needs to be inferred by the other players, basically. And that is it in a nutshell, really.

SPEAKER_03 5:24

Yeah, so I would say that each trick probably takes no more than five minutes, even if you probably play it through.

SPEAKER_00 5:30

Each scenario. Yeah, sorry.

SPEAKER_03 5:32

Yeah, probably takes maybe five or ten if you're particularly thinking about it.

SPEAKER_00 5:36

Yeah. I mean I can't imagine one going on for more than ten minutes, really.

SPEAKER_03 5:40

Each scenario is fairly quick, but there are 50 scenarios in the box.

SPEAKER_00 5:43

And obviously, it it's sort of designed to play through the scenarios in order, but you could also just pick out any scenario from the book and play that. If you're activist. Yeah, well, we'll get on to that. Um so yeah, this was uh a random purchase, another charity shop find for two as charity shop find over the over the years. Um it's always something that I've been vaguely curious about, but I've been put off by the discourse around it at two players, and obviously we'll we'll we'll get onto that. And I believe, I'm not absolutely certain because I haven't played it, I do believe the sequel to it, um Mission Deep C has a better implemented two-player variant out of the box, but I'm not entirely sure about that. So, yeah, trick-taking games.

SPEAKER_03 6:25

We have a couple.

SPEAKER_00 6:26

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 6:27

I think because of the nature of them, they kind of scratch that lighter itch. One of the more complicated heavy games that we play. And I quite like the idea again that it's cooperative because when I've done trick-taking games previously, they've always been competitive.

SPEAKER_00 6:42

Yeah, that is the twist, really.

SPEAKER_03 6:43

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 6:44

Yeah. I mean, the only thing I think I've ever played that it's not the same at all, but is a a vaguely similar wheelhouse as an RB. Not be able to communicate numbered cards trying to work together to to to achieve something. Um, but it's not trick-taking, but it is it it's it's off that vein. So if you've ever played an RB, I think it'd probably scratch a very sort of similar itch, albeit with a little bit more to it than an RBS to it. There's nothing else within the cards that change the gameplay at all. Like you think compare it to something like Fox in the Forest, where you've got trick taking, but there's also all of these cards that have massive effects of the game. There's nothing quite there's nothing like that within within this. Straight up trait trick taking. Yeah. So, yeah, anything else you'd like to say about it in general before we move on to scoring?

SPEAKER_03 7:30

So I like to think of the crew as mind poker.

SPEAKER_00 7:33

Uh yes. Uh for those uninitiated, which is probably everybody in the world except for myself and a good friend of ours, mind poker is a game that Hannah and a friend came up with that basically involves playing poker, but you don't have any cards.

SPEAKER_03 7:45

Yeah, you just do it all in your mind.

SPEAKER_00 7:47

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 7:47

And it's kind of a bit like this because you have to guess what is in someone else's hand.

SPEAKER_00 7:50

This is what I have to deal with, listener. It's mind poker. Yes, mind poker, absolutely. Don't forget to pattern that and start a Kickstarter on it.

SPEAKER_03 7:59

Right, should we get on to scoring then?

SPEAKER_00 8:01

Yes, yeah, I think this is going to be a fairly quick one today. It's quite a light game, so let's let's crack on.

SPEAKER_03 8:06

So the first no general category is components, and I kind of have to say it's quite difficult to get particularly excited about what's essentially a deck of cards.

SPEAKER_00 8:15

Yes, no, absolutely. I mean, yeah, it it is a deck of cards. The cards are standard quality.

SPEAKER_03 8:21

Um the artwork on the cards is well there isn't any, it's a couple of geometric shapes and and different colours. No, it's not geometric states.

SPEAKER_00 8:30

Astronauts and stuff, people doing stuff on the cards. Have you not? I mean, the it's it's very it's very unremarkable.

SPEAKER_02 8:36

I'm gonna open the box.

SPEAKER_00 8:36

Oh we've got we've got a live second unboxing here. Despite playing this about 80 times, Anna apparently doesn't Oh gosh every writes!

SPEAKER_02 8:44

An iPhone Well there you go.

SPEAKER_00 8:50

Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I mean the task cards are just numbers, but the actual cards have some artwork on. But I have to say, it is very unremarkable. It is different coloured astronauts doing random things in space. Um at least you notice. It is nothing to write over about, and after about 80 games, Hannah hasn't even noticed it existed. So I mean that's kind of there's a little bit of damning there, really.

SPEAKER_03 9:09

Um however, I mean it doesn't need to be any more.

SPEAKER_00 9:12

No, it doesn't need to be. It is it is fun, it's functional through and through. Um I have noticed that some of the cards that we have have started to fray a little bit, but we have played about 80 times.

SPEAKER_03 9:22

Yes, and also I do funny shuffling, I do the fancy shuffling.

SPEAKER_00 9:26

Ruffle shuffle, yeah.

SPEAKER_03 9:27

Riffle shuffle, so you know they're not gonna hold up as well.

SPEAKER_00 9:30

Might be a good idea to save these ones, is what I'm saying, if you want this in for the long term. The only little bit I like is the little Astronaut Standee, which denotes the commander. I think for such a small box game, just having something like that's a nice little touch.

SPEAKER_03 9:43

Um the counters that you use in order to determine sort of which tricks need to be completed first. I like standard cardboard little counters. I mean again. Very adequate functional to get excited about, but again, if you were gonna start doing wooden chips and stuff, it's gonna push your price point up to the point that it's probably not financially viable.

SPEAKER_00 10:04

No, well, I mean it will be, it's a very cheap game, but do you want to pay that for that kind of thing? You know, we often talk about set up a teardown in this part.

SPEAKER_03 10:12

Thing is, right, it's not difficult to set up, it's very, very quick. There's a lot of shuffling that's involved, but when you've done it for the hundredth time in the same scenario, it begins to get a little bit Yeah, no bit a bit tired.

SPEAKER_00 10:26

But I mean that's just the nature of the game. I think uh unfortunately the setup of the AI Jarvis adds a little bit to that. And um shuffling out. You can't just shuffle the deck and deal. If you're playing three three plus, you can just shuffle the deck and deal it out, shuffle the task and deal it out. But when you're dealing with Jarvis, you have to take the four rockets out, then you've got to lay all the cards, shuffle, lay all the cards out for Jarvis, put the four rockets back in, shuffle the deck again, and then deal them out.

SPEAKER_03 10:52

But realistically, I mean it doesn't add two minutes.

SPEAKER_00 10:55

It's not Gloomhaven though.

SPEAKER_03 10:57

It's not Gloomhaven, so I don't think there's really anything to play most of it. No, it's a sound just takes two seconds.

SPEAKER_00 11:02

Yeah, it's not a complaint, it's just yeah, just no, letting people know what they're in for. Um, in terms of sort of uh table space, um it doesn't take up a huge amount of room, but uh it's not something you could play on sort of an airplane tray table. You do need a little bit of space to do it.

SPEAKER_03 11:18

You do need a table for it.

SPEAKER_00 11:20

Yeah. Um which I think is always worth mentioning with these kind of small games because there are some like Fox of the Forest that you could literally just play on an airplane tray table.

SPEAKER_01 11:26

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 11:27

Um but this one, no, you will need a table, so a reasonable space to play it on. Okay. Anything else you want to mention on the most?

SPEAKER_03 11:34

Not really. I mean I scored it a six because I think it's perfectly prevented and it but how excited can you get about it?

SPEAKER_00 11:40

Ditto. Yeah, I think it's I think a six is fine. There's nothing wrong with it. Um I think a little bit more on the artwork side would have gone quite a long way.

SPEAKER_03 11:48

I might have noticed it then.

SPEAKER_00 11:49

Yeah, you might have actually noticed it. Um but there's there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. It serves its function, it does what it needs to do. Um, so I think six is fair.

SPEAKER_03 11:57

Cool. Um and then on to complexity. So as always, this isn't necessarily about how complex the game is, but it's how much the complexity serves the gameplay, as you like to say. Yeah. Um this also includes things like analysis paralysis, arguing about rules, etc. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 12:12

Well no arguing during the game aloud.

SPEAKER_03 12:15

Well, in Tree Forb, we fucked up like the first ten rounds because we didn't understand how rockets worked, but that's because we're stupid, not because of the rule book.

SPEAKER_00 12:24

Speak for yourself, it was just a different interpretation. What was it stupid to say? Interpretation of the rules. Yeah, I mean, it is not a complex game, it is a lightweight game. Um, the complexity comes from the puzzle they're in. The complexity comes from the scenarios themselves.

SPEAKER_03 12:41

I think there was one scenario we had to look up, but I think that's because we just weren't sure rather than the rules not being particularly clear.

SPEAKER_00 12:47

Uh there have been a few where I've kind of I've taken to Google, I have to say. I think that the rule book is good, but it is not the best I've ever read.

SPEAKER_03 12:56

I think what's really cool about the rulebook is each of the scenarios comes with some flavour text, like a paragraph about, you know, how your machinery is fucked up and w what's happening thematically. But the actual instructions for the scenario itself are all pictorial.

SPEAKER_00 13:11

Yeah, yeah, icons basically. Yeah. And I spent a lot of time looking up icons where I just thought maybe just a couple of another sentence might have been quicker and easier. I know it looks prettier, but after you know, you read the rules and then that's it. Um but the rule book itself, you've got one book that's divided into scenarios, the logbook, and the other that's the the rules. And there were a couple of sort of edge cases, I'd call them, where I did have to take to Google because I wasn't quite sure how how they worked. It wasn't particularly clear. Maybe that was just me being thick, but I I I I've read much simpler rules for more complex games, if that makes sense. The rules were also quite long-winded for considering how you know how basic it is, which makes me think a bit of editing and a bit of better writing of them would would go a long way. Um in terms of the game itself, I mean the the complexity does serve the game, you know. I I don't think it's missing anything, it does it it it fills that niche. You can crack it out and have a couple of games of this as a uh a moose bush before even an ado. Um I think it's it's a it's a great game to get the juices flowing in that sense. Um so the complexity's quite quite right for it, I think.

SPEAKER_03 14:20

Yeah, I would absolutely agree with that. I think the rules themselves are simple, the devil in the detail is obviously the scenarios, and I I think it's accessible to most people.

SPEAKER_00 14:28

Yeah, I think you'd have a hard time finding somebody who couldn't get their head round this. Like even like the most casual of gamers, I think, could get their heads around this.

SPEAKER_01 14:36

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 14:37

It might take a little while. G Granny might have need three or five rounds, but you know, Granny Sports will probably probably probably better than you. Um so you know, uh I I think I think it's fine. I think it's nothing like, wow, this does something unbelievable with a genre that I've never seen before. That's not what this is. No, that's not what it is, but that I don't think there's any enormous sort of crazy ingenuity in the rules or anything like that. So I've given it a seven. So I gave it an eight. Above average.

SPEAKER_03 15:04

I think it's pretty much bang on what it needs to be, really. Fair enough. Um, and I think yeah, it's yeah, it's good.

SPEAKER_00 15:10

On to shelf life and value for money.

SPEAKER_03 15:12

So this retails for around£12 each.

SPEAKER_00 15:15

Yeah, a£12 mark.

SPEAKER_03 15:17

Um, so what I would say is there is a huge for a little box, there is a huge amount of content.£50 scenarios is quite a lot of scenarios, and bearing in mind as you get towards later games, you know that you're not going to complete it in one go, you're gonna have to have several cracks of it.

SPEAKER_00 15:33

No.

SPEAKER_03 15:33

Um, and we've had this for a while, and we've sort of steadily plugged away.

SPEAKER_00 15:39

Yeah, I'd say about six to eight months we've had this.

SPEAKER_03 15:42

Yeah, and I mean we go through peaks and drops, but I think we've steadily plugged away there to be disoccupied for for that that that time period. So I think in terms of value for money, it's absolutely cracking.

SPEAKER_00 15:53

Yeah, it is. It it is really good for value for money. I think your your mileage may vary depending on how enjoyable you find the core concept, but there there's also an aspect here where playgroups have probably got a lot to do with this. Um and we will I I don't want to I don't want to sort of step on the toes of the next section, but perhaps not the best game at two. Can you find three or more people to play with regularly, which will probably give it a lot I can imagine this being a regular part of a board gaming group's life to get the juices flowing, as I said, for a very long time.

SPEAKER_01 16:30

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 16:30

And for the£12 price of entry, that's absolutely insane value, like really, really good. But your mileage may vary with two players.

SPEAKER_03 16:40

It's also essentially a series of scenarios. So, I mean, the other way you could play it is you could probably make a committed effort and get to get through it in maybe three or four play sessions, depending on how many players you've got and and stuff like that. But then I think it would be very much more a one and done kind of thing. I can't imagine completing it and then wanting to go back to it for a very long time. In my head, it's definitely one and one and done kind of yeah, and I I imagine a lot of people will feel like that.

SPEAKER_00 17:09

But I again if you also approached it by just finding scenarios that you really enjoyed, you could probably just play those over and over again.

SPEAKER_03 17:15

So you're playing with season ball gamers, then you just start at scenario 30.

SPEAKER_00 17:19

Yeah, you know, for example, which is which is where it starts to get quite juicy. Juicy, yeah, it's a good word for it. Um, but as I mean, as I I mentioned a couple of times, we played this over 80 times. Um, I can't think about how many hours we've spent on it, but for£12, that's pretty pretty damn good. Yeah. There is it it is the biggest example of a lot of game in a tiny box I think I've ever seen. Like, there's a lot there. And the scenarios do keep it fresh and interesting, things do change up all the time. It's not just playing the same game over and over and over again. I don't think the depth depth is necessarily there to allow for the same game over and over again. Like I've seen smaller boxes that I want you would just play the same thing over and over again. I mean, think about things like Love Letter and Fox of the Forest, like there's there's a there's a beauty to them that doesn't really exist here, in my personal opinion. Um but the the variance of the scenarios does keep it relatively fresh. We haven't finished it. We we stopped at scenario 40. Well have stopped at scenario 40. Um I'll explain why in the the two-player section a bit more. But yeah, I mean I have zero regrets purchasing it. We've we've had a lot of fun with it.

SPEAKER_03 18:30

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 18:30

Um so for for that reason I give it an eight.

SPEAKER_03 18:34

Yeah, so I gave it a seven.

SPEAKER_00 18:35

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 18:35

Um, but yeah, I think it's um uh in terms of its shelf life and replayability. Oh, value for money, I think, is exceptional.

SPEAKER_00 18:42

Yeah, yeah. Yeah, absolutely.

SPEAKER_03 18:44

So, our final category under the general scoring is fun. And here I have to ask for a question. When we're talking about fun, are we talking about fun as a two-player or are we talking about fun as like a great one? Yeah, it's a tough one, it's a tough one this.

SPEAKER_00 18:59

And I can see it quite clearly. Um I don't need to play this with loads of people to see it. It is a fun game.

SPEAKER_01 19:05

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 19:06

But again, treading on the toes the next section, it is a less fun game of two players. But that's not what we're reviewing in this part. So I'm going to I'm going to try and put my objectivity hat on.

SPEAKER_03 19:17

Just pretend we have friends, basically.

SPEAKER_00 19:20

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. We don't have any friends. It's just you and us listener, that's it. Or family, just all left. Um because my board game addiction. Anyway, um I digress. It's a fun game. Is it a game that I want to, you know, let off silly string and fireworks whenever somebody, you know, you suggest bringing it out? No. Um it doesn't capture my imagination like a lot of other games do. But it is a fun puzzle to try and work through. And I think the more people you added to that puzzle equation, the more fun it would be. Um it is a good laugh. It's it's it's easy, it's breezy, but also thinky. So yeah, it it's a fun game. It's nothing that I go crazy about. How about you?

SPEAKER_03 20:07

Uh yeah, so I definitely think it'd be fun. The more players you have, I think the more fun it would be. Um, and yeah, it's definitely a puzzle. So it's not necessarily um often when we talk about this, we talk about um, you know, that role-playing element perhaps, or the things that come it it's not like that, but it is definitely fun. And I've really enjoyed, I think, some of our more challenging games that we really had to sit there and think, and we've sort of been looking and we've been calculating induction Deduction? Induction?

SPEAKER_00 20:38

Deduction. Induction?

SPEAKER_03 20:40

Um yeah, it is it is fun.

SPEAKER_00 20:44

Yeah, and it's satisfying. Yeah when you win, it is very satisfying when you win. That's often a question I ask in the section, like is it is it good is it fun to win?

SPEAKER_03 20:52

And it must be because we've kept going.

SPEAKER_00 20:54

Yeah. Yeah, I think if we weren't having any fun, we would just sack it off in like scenario twenty.

SPEAKER_03 21:00

Um I scored it a seven on the basis that if we're talking about general fun rating.

SPEAKER_00 21:04

I gave a six.

SPEAKER_03 21:05

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 21:05

Yeah. So yeah, quite quite quite close in our general appraisal of the game this time, I think. Which is interesting because we usually differ on certain things and we're we're quite close at this one.

SPEAKER_03 21:18

Alright, let's total up those scores.

SPEAKER_00 21:20

So that gives us a overall rating of six point eight. As always, we round, so that rounds to a seven.

SPEAKER_03 21:26

Fair and reasonable, I think.

SPEAKER_00 21:28

I think so, yeah. It's a good game. Um I'm happy with that, and I think uh our our opinions on the the two player side of things, I don't think, have coloured that too much. So, yeah, it's a good game.

SPEAKER_03 21:39

Okay, so on to our two player categories then.

SPEAKER_00 21:42

Here we go.

SPEAKER_03 21:43

And the first one is Table Talkslash Getting to Know You.

SPEAKER_00 21:48

So I don't know how the hell you are supposed to review a game about Table Talk where you're not allowed to talk. I find this, full disclosure, I found this category exceptionally difficult.

SPEAKER_03 22:00

So here's the thing, right? You're not allowed to talk, you're only allowed to communicate one thing, maybe, and that's by putting a token down. But the other thing that I found, and so I I get that as a concept, and that's that's cool, and that's kind of quirky, I guess. The thing that I found difficult was like because you can't talk about strategy, you can't even necessarily talk like once the game's over.

SPEAKER_00 22:21

No.

SPEAKER_03 22:22

I feel like it's a bit cheaty to do that.

SPEAKER_00 22:24

Yeah, it's almost a bit like metagamy, isn't it?

SPEAKER_03 22:26

Yeah, like well, I I did this because I thought that XYZ.

SPEAKER_00 22:29

And next time let's not do it. Yeah, which uh you probably can within the rules, but it does, it feels wrong.

SPEAKER_03 22:34

It does, it feels a bit wrong.

SPEAKER_00 22:35

So I I feel like our sessions we bring this out, we don't talk for half an hour, we just sit there slapping down cards and mumbling occasionally we move on.

SPEAKER_03 22:44

And how much then? I think it's because of that I was thinking, well, maybe maybe the whole getting to know you, like thinking about how you work. Like sometimes you would play things over and over again. I'm like, what the fuck are you doing? Why why are you hammering this point home? Well cards clearly, it's because in your head you're trying to achieve something.

SPEAKER_00 23:00

Yeah, I have a strategy.

SPEAKER_03 23:01

Um I still don't understand what that is, and afterwards I can't even ask you because I feel like it's cheaper. It's best gaming, yeah. So it's not only is there very there is no table talk, it uh it's also kind of a confusing game at times.

SPEAKER_00 23:15

Yeah, it can be, yeah. It's a really tough one. In terms of getting to and again, getting to know you, it's it you know it's difficult unless you do properly talk through it. But I guess again, if you're in that realm of a relationship or friendship where you were genuinely interested as to how people tick and work through these things, perhaps you do sit down and talk through, and perhaps it's a really good conversation starter.

SPEAKER_03 23:41

And also, maybe you're quite early on in your relationship. That's yeah, sorry. You know, where you don't want the pressure of having to make quips and stuff all the time. Like that could be it could fill a really interesting or you know unique space. Unique space in a in a relationship's kind of also sometimes I'm just bored of listening to you and it's just I mean I I am to be fair, so you know, I have to edit these.

SPEAKER_00 24:04

Um you almost said the thing. You're bored with bored with? No, no, no, no, not away from it, not away from it. Okay, alright, I tried. But yeah, I mean I felt really odd about scoring this in either direction, so I took the coward's way out and gave it a five.

SPEAKER_03 24:22

Yeah, no, I put it as a two because we are scoring it on the basis of table talk. We we think that that's really important as a top part of a two-player game in our niche, so um there isn't any, and like I say, it's that post-game discussion space that doesn't really exist. Doesn't really exist that I also am a bit unsatisfied with, but I understand why. However, other people may have different wants from games, and in which case it might tick all those boxes.

SPEAKER_00 24:48

And that's a rule you've imposed on yourself, to be fair. There's nothing rules that stops you discussing things at length in between games, so you know.

SPEAKER_03 24:54

Yeah, I do still think that's kind of cheaty.

SPEAKER_00 24:56

Yeah, it does feel a bit wrong, doesn't it? Yeah. Yeah. Okay, fine. Well, well done for being the brave out of the two of us.

SPEAKER_03 25:03

Um so our next category is competitiveness slash co-op basically.

SPEAKER_00 25:07

Cooperability. Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 25:09

Okay.

SPEAKER_00 25:10

Um I mean this kind of overlaps a lot, I think, with the previous uh category where I think about what it is that I enjoy from a co-op experience. What I enjoy from a co-op experience is that joint strategizing and seeing things that you strategise to together pay off. You can't strategize in this. And I appreciate that's very much a me thing. Other people may just enjoy that sort of almost like there's no there's no quarterbacking, there's no having no quarterbacking, you can't be. There's no there's no ability of your playing partners to, or partner in this case, to affect your play. Because you are completely out on your own, you have to do what you're gonna do. Um, but again, for people that enjoy carp games that might find that they lean on somebody else to make it enjoyable, um they might find this quite stressful. And if you have people of very differing uh skill levels with it, it yeah, yeah. It you might end up in a situation where one person's getting quite annoyed at the other and another person feels a little bit.

SPEAKER_03 26:20

No, I don't think you necessarily would even necessarily see that, to be honest. Because you don't know what's in someone else's hand. No, you don't. I've made stupid plays before.

SPEAKER_00 26:29

Well, we both have, yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_03 26:30

But you also don't necessarily know that someone's making a stupid play because actually y it it might not be depending on what's in that person's hand. So you might just have to let it go let it go.

SPEAKER_00 26:42

No, don't don't um yeah it it's it's it's a tough one. I think I have to it by its nature th those could be positive or negative negative points for you, but I have to I have to review this as me and my personal opinion.

SPEAKER_03 27:00

So now you're gonna stand and hold true to your your morals.

SPEAKER_00 27:04

Yeah, I think it's a rating.

SPEAKER_03 27:05

Not not with table talk.

SPEAKER_00 27:07

Yeah, now now I am because I I feel more comfortable with this one. But yeah, it doesn't quite fit the bill for a co-op experience that I look for. I think that's that that's the the ultimate uh conclusion for me for this.

SPEAKER_03 27:20

Yeah, so I would agree with that in the sense that it it it's cooperative in the sense that you're not competing with each other, uh uh uh but it doesn't really feel necessarily like a cooperative game.

SPEAKER_00 27:31

No, no, it feels like you're you're playing in your own little zone, both hoping to achieve your goals, i.e., completing the scenario.

SPEAKER_03 27:38

I mean I did sit on the fence on this one and I scored it at five because I didn't really know how to score it.

SPEAKER_00 27:42

Yeah, fair enough. I went for a three for this one. Um it has its good points, but in terms of what I look for in a carb experience these days, it's not really it. It doesn't hit it for me. Last but definitely not least, scalability. So this in essence is how if you're playing it as two, does d do you miss having other players? Does it work as a two-player game? Short answer? No. No. I mean it does to a point. Uh I think what we've discovered is uh and what I I think I've inferred is in the earlier stages of the scenarios, so probably up until about the midpoint, I think having Jarvis and having the visibility of those cards, because you have so few tasks to win, actually makes the game easier. Perhaps even trivial to a point.

SPEAKER_01 28:34

Yes.

SPEAKER_00 28:35

But you reach a point where those hidden cards that are trapped underneath cards can make a disturbing number of scenarios impossible. Um, to the point that you just have to keep going again and again and again until you get the right card draw, which feels quite rote and annoying. Yeah. And when you get to up towards where we got to, scenario 40, the last few scenarios are nigh on impossible. You have to get very, very lucky. And for a game that is so strategic, it feels very antithetical to rely on that luck.

SPEAKER_03 29:08

But we've kind of also said that it's not strategic because you can't communicate with other people. I also think there's an element we didn't use communication enough. I don't think that was our issue. But you you're absolutely right. There were scenarios that we started and after we drew our tasks, one of us turned around was like, this is unplay. Yeah, we just had to fold immediately.

SPEAKER_00 29:32

Which is a design issue, but it's not a design issue that I'm going to hold against the designs because this again, this is not a two-player game. And again, we go back to what this podcast is about. This is about because there there are the uh instances where load of uh you the general overarching discourse is uh this is no good at two players, and I think about something like Terra Mystica, which I think is absolutely fantastic. So we do I I tend to approach games that have a lot of discourse around them, like oh this is not suitable for two, with a bit of an open mind, because I've I've I found that it's not always the case. This, however, fully agree with the the discourse.

SPEAKER_03 30:07

I think when you we stopped playing because I think we fell it was broken, essentially. It's it's broken for two players, like there's no way that we could make it work. Uh you potentially could, you could keep slogging away, but you just handed up the last number. We played 15 games of the last number of scenario forty, yeah. Without waiting, it doesn't become fun anymore. Yeah, you just suck the joy out of it.

SPEAKER_00 30:28

You kind of just sit to the sorry, go on.

SPEAKER_03 30:30

However, there are some people that might actually get a real kick out of playing it 30 times and going, Finally we got there. Yeah. That's not us.

SPEAKER_00 30:38

But I feel like with the AI component, it's more about getting the right the the right draw of cards in the AI space combined with the right tasks, and it feels less like you're winning. It feels like you've just finally got a lucky draw and therefore you can move on, and that's not why I play ball games. I I I want I I want that agency to be able to go, yeah, we did this. Whereas if you play it sort of like 15 times, then all of a sudden you win because you got a really lucky draw. It feels really hollow. Yeah. It's just like, oh, we finally got the cards to fall the right way, and therefore we move on. Um, and that's why I think I I I uh that starrive audio is just like I'm done now because I'm not you know I'm not getting any joy out of this. It it doesn't work as two. No, it does not work as two. You can you can get some fun, but you will you will if you have this on the shelf, there's so many other things you can bring out.

SPEAKER_03 31:31

But that said, I really enjoyed it and had a really good time up until probably we hit around 35 scenarios that you can.

SPEAKER_00 31:40

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_03 31:42

And again, if you think about the price point, I know that you know there's a different category and all that, but if you think about the price point, 12 quid for the amount of fun we've had out of it, just accepting and knowing that we're probably never gonna get to the end, I think that's fine.

SPEAKER_00 31:54

Yeah, that's absolutely fine. I mean we've got a lot of mileage out of it.

SPEAKER_03 31:57

Um the other question though is you know, again, thinking about our lives and our um you know our gaming, we're not necessarily gonna have that cool group of people that will work through the whole walks with us.

SPEAKER_00 32:10

No, but I mean there's a lot of scenarios there. Again, you'd need a Gloomhaven level crew to continuously work through them. No, but um but still, but this is not a game that you'll sit down and play for three hours over and over again. I I think it's quite unlikely. So, in that essence, you probably need a a dedicated group of people to do it over a very a crew, if you will, to do it over a long period of time, and that's quite hard to find. Um I think this probably has more mileage in picking random scenarios out and go, oh let's play a few of these. And for that, it's great. I mean, as a three or three to five player game, I imagine it's a great deal of fun.

SPEAKER_01 32:48

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 32:49

Um, but in terms of FOMO and scalability, I'm gonna give it my first one.

SPEAKER_03 32:54

Oh, so I would be inclined to give it a zero. Can we score zero? No, we never score now. Okay, one then.

SPEAKER_00 33:00

One. Yeah, so I've never given a one before, but I'm gonna have to give one here because I just think I think fundamentally it is broken at two. Yeah, it is broken at two. Uh I think they they gave it a try with the uh the AI component. But it's just it's not quite far enough, and I feel like it needs something extra to make it a bit more workable, and it's just it's not there. And I don't think the scenarios were designed with two in mind, as the the last the the latter third, shall we say, is made absolutely apparent. Okay.

SPEAKER_03 33:29

Alright, so let's add it up.

SPEAKER_00 33:30

So yeah, that gives us a average total of 2.8, which we round to three, which is definitely our lowest scoring game so far in any any of the the either of the two categories that we work with. Um I'm not gonna sit here and say that's a disservice. I just don't think it's a good two player game at all. It's a bad two player game. It's a good game, but it's a bad two player game. So yeah, that wraps it up for this episode. Um until next time, be good to each other and play lots of board games.