Great Western Trail | Rahdo's Final Thoughts

Help Rahdo Run: / rahdo ❤️ Code of conduct: conduct.rahdo.com 🙂 And now...
A video outlining gameplay for the boardgame Great Western Trail.
For more game info, boardgamegeek....
Part I: Gameplay Runthrough
• Great Western Trail Ga...
• (static cam) Great Wes... (Static Cam)
Part II: Extended Gameplay
• Great Western Trail Ex...
• (static cam) Great Wes... (Static)
Part III: Final Thoughts
• Great Western Trail | ...
-------------------

[@rolandoorozco599]

I don't always agree with your final thoughts, but your playthroughs are awesome. You do a great job of showing the game. Thanks for all the work.

[@Atlas-FM8]

I think the game offers enough ways to circumvent the obstacles other players put in your path that it really minimizes any take that. For example, you can always go bankrupt before crossing any taxation space or place a taxation space of your own right next to it (zero sum gain basically) or just remove hazards so you can take an alternative route. Terrific game, amazing design with a lot of interesting decisions.

[@rahdo]

that's why you put your tax building on the board right before your opponents critical strategic buildings that cost $, so that if they want use them, they've got to pay you...

[@filiplazov5895]

Wow Rahdo, It's like your threshold for 'mean' is getting lower every year, I bet you would find games that you love mean if you revisit them :)

[@Kr1stmas]

you can tell by the first 30 seconds when he says he loved it if he actually loved it or he says it wasnt for him

[@zephro666000]

Played a three player game this evening and we loved it. I didn't find the other players "pay me tiles" and/or hazard placement titles to be a big deal at all especially in the later half of the game when I was earning so much money in Kansas City that a few dollar here and a few dollar there wasn't an issue, so I really didn't find the game mean at all.

[@ledbetter10]

I agree there are ways to mess with our opponents...but it never feels "mean" in the ways it may feel in other games. I think there are enough ways to mitigate this when your opponent tries to hurt you that it really isn't a huge concern. Glad you're hanging onto it!

[@Aquadoozy]

Totally see your view on the set beginner tiles versus "mixed up" ones. First game we used them in the set spaces, scored 89 and 83 points. Second game we randomized everything and scored only 55 and 52 points. It's hard! But it's definitely an enjoyable challenge, the game is brilliant.

[@ChrischoBoardgaming]

I bought the game when and because it was cheap, but didn't play it for nearly a year and a half, because I thought I'd dislike it due to its theme. But though I still like fighting monsters more than driving cattle, it's astonishing how the theme takes a step back behind the brilliant design of GWT. I like it very much for its "crunchiness" and enjoy it even as simulated-2p as much as a good book ("page turner"). However, I have the strong suspicion that investing in engineers, speeding up the railroad and winning the station master tokens might trump erecting buildings or increasing the herd's value. Confirmation of that suspicion would diminish the high opinion I have of this game, but I need to test & try more. I totally agree to your final thoughts up to the moment when you start talking about the take-that elements. Trying to mess up an opponent's plans is so much countered by having to sacrifice one's own plans that GWT as a whole does not feel especially mean. And since every player has access to the same buildings and options to potentially harm other players GWT seems fair enough to me and it only adds to the crunchiness of this game that one has to weigh all the options against each other.

[@Johannes_W]

Actually never thought of GWT being a cutthroat game, haha. But I get your points. Just wondering how it would work if you'd remove that from the game? It would be plain resource counting for a large part, wouldn't it? I mean there is nothing wrong with resource optimisation like Scythe, but for a great game I need the tension of having my plans destroyed at any moment if I don't plan ahead.

[@shatnershairpiece]

Good game, but marred by 1) five useless hazard trails where it is pointless to build due to expenses from hazards always popping up. Four games in and no one has ever built there. 2) craftsmen are underpowered compared to cowboys, engineers. Much harder to get a build strategy going. Usual buildings don't go above three. Reminds me of book track in mombasa: could work, but most people won't bother trying to find the solution. 3) game is very long, running 3-4 hrs first game with two players, maybe down to 2.5 after a few games. Still like it more than Mombasa.

[@pottedmeat8023]

shatnershairpiece just played last night, one of the players built on a hazard trail, the rest of us kept putting hazards in his way, he kept taking them down over and over, turns out he grabbed an outcropping token on the railroad track that gave him VP for each hazard he owned at the end of the game, none of us really paid any attention, he ended up making 20+ VP on hazard tiles alone. Also don't forget you can upgrade buildings, so If you have a 3 worker building you can upgrade it to a higher building by paying the multiplier difference, we had people with 9+ vp buildings by the end of the game.

[@mach186282]

If you never go for craftsmen, you'll never live the joy of placing the "4 coins, 4 train advancement, move ahead 4 spaces" building and then placing the "copy an adjacent building's actions" building next to it to double the benefits.... Also clearing out hazards to use risk actions isn't always so hard...and you might be able to "encourage" the other players to help you out (or someone else will do the "encouraging" for you) by placing a toll building on the main trail parallel to the hazards. They tend to disappear pretty quickly after that.

[@delorean-88]

I know rahdo doesn't like to play with house rules, but one possible way to reduce take-that factor in this game could be paying the owner of the passed-by building from the bank instead. Besides, all hazards are positioned on separate route branches and in principle could be avoided by a player wishing to have full route and cash flow control.

[@SpaceLordof75]

Wow, cutthroat? There needs to be a stronger term than "carebear". GWT is my 2nd favorite of 2016.

[@delorean-88]

SpaceLordof75 rahdo actually used the term "overcarebear" at the end of the video

[@clumsydad7158]

I'm with you man... and as a fairly inexperience gamer, this game is just too much for me to chew. personally, not excited about cows... maybe because we already have too many in Wisconsin !! (-: peace

[@smoothcriminal28]

Clumsy Dad Clumsy, this game is amazing. It is fairly simple after a few rounds. You should def try it.

[@HaviccB]

Played this game last weekend twice, still thinking about it. can't wait to play it again. Pfisters next game is an autobuy.

[@PiotrPilas]

In my copy of the game one red tile have mistake (8a/8a). Wrong printed? Despite this, for me it is on the first place in December 2016. Greetings from Poland!

[@kevinspoll4142]

Yes, it's a misprint, but there will be replacement tiles available next year: www.eggertspiele.de/Spiel/Great_Western_Trail/8/57

[@rahdo]

thanks for the heads up, i didn't know!

[@PureNRG2]

Care bear, shmare bear. Thanks for another great playthrough and analysis. When you imply it's too "take that"', that's fine, because it still tells me that this is a game for me as I really enjoy that element in a game. So it's definitely on my to buy list and Alexander Pfister. Say no more.

[@eirikfarmen1062]

Alexander Pfister is brilliant. Ill make a bet With myself that in 2020 he is my favorite desginer. Now its Stefan Feld, but the way Pfister is going im betting he will pass him

[@huan4230]

I said exactly the same thing to myself this year. While waiting for a free table for GWT at Essen I played Jorvik and was slightly disappointed.

[@marcussousa1308]

王欢 You know Jorvik is just a reimplementation of one of his old games, right?

[@huan4230]

Yeah I knew that, but I've never played the old game, and I think it's only available in German?

[@eirikfarmen1062]

Got Jorvik, its Nice enough

[@ChrischoBoardgaming]

@@eirikfarmen1062 "Nice enough" is exactly the term I use when I don't want to say "brilliant" but am equally far away from calling something or someone "shitty". Sort of like "okay". If Feld kept on publishing (just) "okay" (or "nice enough") games, Pfister might indeed take the lead. But as far as I'm concerned, I can live with not ranking game designers and merely feeling blessed to share the same world with such talented people and benefit from them.

[@XvpandaX]

Honestly, this game has such a brilliant design, but the theme doesn't really intrest me at all. I also don't see a way to get my gaming group (partner) to play it either. Its a shame, but I don't think I'm going to get this.

[@ramonosuke]

I'm on that same exact boat. I think the theme works in this game, but I don't think I can get anyone to play it, due to its theme

[@deanofgames4661]

XvpandaX to me the theme of the American Wild West is perfect. Different strokes.

[@zephro666000]

Get it and play it and promise, your group will fall in love with it as the design is brilliant.

[@deuxvega]

Aways surprised with the reasoning of rahdo 😁 saying being a carebear and then 'choose' to be mean to Co players vs doing what scores himself more points. Taking something away from someone just to take it from them also means your undermining your own strategy and goals. So under the line it doesn't matter. Just choose your own path instead of being mean to the other. Problem solved.

[@rahdo]

problem solved if you're playing with at least 3 players. in a 2p game, everything i do to hinder you is putting me ahead in the game, and so is just as valid a tactic :)

[@deuxvega]

rahdo fair enough. But it's mostly also a choice to play like that. Although indeed, you can't escape having to pay your opponent now and then. Thanks for the reply. Love your videos 😁

[@NeORomani]

we are also very carebear, my wife didn't like seeland because I closed one of her mills with a 0, and she got angry. Would you say this game has more, less or equal degree of cutthroat than that?

[@boardgamefangirl]

LOL Seeland seems like opposite of a take-that/cut throat type of game.

[@rahdo]

i'd say they're similar, but seeland is moreso :)

[@Davearmstrong42]

I'm curious as to how long your 2p game was. Ours takes nearly 3 hours.

[@rahdo]

first was 3 hours or so, but subsequent plays were 2-ish

[@Davearmstrong42]

We are working on a variant to shave off an hour for those times when you want to play it but don't have the time.

[@freejunk2]

what is cutthroat in TM?

[@rahdo]

i talked about it in the final thoughts vid i did for it...

[@deanofgames4661]

freejunk2 I believe it was in regard to the meteor shower.

[@freejunk2]

but there's no guarantee you will see those cards. i mean you can have many games with no cutthroat...where as here, the buildings are always there and you can always build it to screw over other ppl. i don't get it

[@deanofgames4661]

freejunk2 watch his Terraforming Mars vid. It may not make sense to you, but he and his wife are more sensitive to anything resembling aggression. He even says to disregard his comments regarding aggression as he is very sensitive to aggression. For me, the value of his renews is watching the gameplay. I pretty much don't give any thought to whether he likes it or not because of his ultra sensitivity to aggression (He calls it Care Bear which actually might be better)

[@freejunk2]

no what im saying is in TM, there's no guarantee you will get those cards that causes aggression, you could play many games without getting those cards. where as here, the buildings are always there for the players to build and to block each other so why isn't GWT more aggressive. TM is tame compared to GWT.

[@johnrice9428]

Taxing your opponents is a big plus for me. Opponents need to learn how to spend their money before reaching these buildings.

[@rahdo]

thats why you put them right before their buildings where they need to spend money, or right after buildings where they're likely to make money

[@zephro666000]

So house rule ignore the taxation buildings

[@ronhatch9175]

Hmm. I don't mind cutthroat, particularly when it isn't excessive. But what I saw of the gameplay in the runthrough just didn't look like anything special to me. Plus I always hate anything that takes away from the theme. Such as "This cattle you've got here? It's worth absolutely nothing because you just sold me another one of the same type." If it was worth LESS that way, it wouldn't bother me... but worth NOTHING bugs me no end. Anyway, different tastes I guess.

[@matts3155]

I didn't care for the taxation buildings either. you can set up choke points that are either pay me or pay the obstacles

[@nkorppi]

Which is better, IKI or Great Western Trail? I love IKI.

[@christianstadegaart807]

Hi Rahdo, I really love your videos, especially because you have the same taste for games that me and my wife have, and you emphasize 2 players in games. But, the way you explained this game in your runthrough, it seems you kind of misunderstood this game and how you could enjoy playing it, which is sad really, because the game deserves more.

[@dddmmm21]

Didn't you think it was too long?

[@rahdo]

nope, length if fine we thought

[@guillermoz4914]

I've been looking for long games. Any other euro games great for 2 players?

[@JanelleBSN]

Rahdo confuses me sometimes- he is a self proclaimed 'care bear' and complains about this games meanness, but has Troyes in his top ten. I love Troyes, possibly my favorite game of all time, but it is hard to play with some people because you are constantly fighting each other and the game itself. How can you possibly complain about the take that in this game when you clearly have no problem with other games that are saturated in it? What about the game is really bothering you?

[@rahdo]

troyes is not a particularly mean game, because the dice don't belong to you. the dice you roll are ones you can get at a discount, or that i can pay full price for. there's no ownership there. the game isn't even remotely take that, imo

[@graphycus]

​@@rahdo There's no ownership, but you've invested some of your dice in your previous turn to actually earn them from the buildings. Instead of doing other stuff with them. So if someone earned a lot of money on a previous turn, he can actually "steal" your whole plan and gain a ridiculous amount of VPs.

[@rahdo]

@@graphycus we've only ever found the area control (pushing each other out of buildings) to be born of necessity, rather than direct screwage. sort of a "sorry i kicked you out, but i had to get in there myself, and there's only so much room". again, to us, this feels very different to other games where teh sole point of your actions are to hurt your opponent (which we don't care for)

[@graphycus]

​@@rahdo I refered to the buying of your opponent's dice, rather than the area control actions. Especially in the later phases of the game, if your opponent is the starting player and he has enough money to "steal" your higher value dice, he can easily convert them into VPs with a proper activity card. I think the same statements are true for both games, that if you want to hurt your opponent, you can easily do it, even if that doesn't necessarily fits into your plan.

[@rahdo]

@@graphycus again, our perspective is you can't have stolen something that doesn't necessarily belong to you. there are dice i have to pay full price for and dice i can get an discount on. just because it was rolled out of my hand doesn't mean it's my dice. when we look at the table, we're making plans assuming all the dice (ours and the neutral ones). if we can get them on the cheap, awesome, but we don't expect to.