Miami Dice: A Column of Fire

[@rmcunningham3874]

This was a great review! You guys had a very smart and interesting conversation. I like when you get deep into the design.

[@Jeff321]

Wow that board looks amazing!

[@Rb-hm5ml]

Jeff3210 indeed !

[@vololudo4671]

yeah the board for all three of the games look great

[@phredric]

Read the book, and the game seems to be really connected to the book. Probably a great play for those who have read it, whereas Pillars you don't need to necessarily have read the book to really enjoy it.

[@acemind1]

phredric Yeah when they were saying the religious conflict part could have been left on the floor, I was thinking "not if you want to stay true to the book"

[@JefferyHunt]

I enjoyed both Pillars and World Without End. World Without End was the best, but this one is great imo.

[@PredicadorLC]

I Like this game, not as much as Pillars of the Earth but I keep both in my collection. This game has luck in it but it can be contrarrested with some decisions and using the protection tiles in various ways. And I enjoyed a lot the religion mechanism, because you have to have and eye on it always. I'm with Sam whith this one. I think the designer (or maybe the publisher) wanted a more family easy game, and dice and luck help to this purpose.

[@justinprice8385]

I find that the Pillars board is also largely unused... covered with resource piles. I didn’t penalize it then, and I guess I wouldn’t penalize this game for that board either. Interesting thoughts though, thanks!

[@bethanyrimington-warner7757]

The only Dice chucking I want to do is for Pulsar 2849! Still looks interesting

[@clownworlddotfart]

You all have a purple hue to you. I guess on the positive side, you match the tabletop.

[@StefanLopuszanski]

Seems like the biggest prbolem with the game is one I came to while you were explaining the rules. There's no decision making over using die results that give mixed outcomes. I wonder how the game would be if you put your house on the opposite number you used to claim a card and when rolling the die for religion on when you can switch you'd get that many points (extend the track a bit to compensate). That way those who can switch religions quickly get less points. Probably pretty minor tweaks that would make the game a lot better.

[@chrismusix5669]

'It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing!'

[@JefferyHunt]

Protection tokens can also be used to prevent religion tokens from being placed in the conflict zones when you place a card. This is a major part of the game!! It has a significant effect on strategy. It frustrates me to no end when a game is reviewed poorly or favorably when the rules are not being played correctly. This, among other rules, were missed in the live playthrough and I’m sure they played it again since then, but you think they’d get the rule right to such a simple game.

[@JefferyHunt]

I’m a huge fan, btw. I’m not hating on you guys, just would like to see rules played correctly in 2018. Forget improved sound quality haha.

[@PredicadorLC]

Agreed, they play some rules wrong in the live play, and those rules can reduce the luck factor that is the main problem they have with this game.

[@lammyrock]

Jeffery Hunt -in the dice towers defense, if they miss a rule, others might too. I agree, that's a big rule, and playing many times (as I have) will reveal more interesting strategies and tactics, but few people will give any game the attention it needs to fully appreciate it. That said, this game continues to grow on me and I like it a lot.

[@JefferyHunt]

Thomas Wetzel true, and I did find little rules like that hard to find in the book.

[@rogerx1258]

A total deal breaker is when a game seems strategic but turns out to be heavily luck dependent. The way luck is handled in a game is very important. Completely luck based games are fine as long as they know what they are and don´t overstay they´re welcome. In a more thinky "euro style" game luck should never play to big of a role in my opinion. Otherwise it quickly becomes a useless activity where everyone tries or depends to be strategic while the lucky stuff mostly decides how the game goes. Even if you are not completely restricted by the luck I think it is a waste of time to constantly try to menage the lucky parts in a game that wants to be also tactical and a little strategic. It just feels wrong and means that the winner of the game is more often than not decided by luck. I also had to think about Stoneage but there are a lot of culprits of this. Luck itself is hugely important to ad variety und help to make a game not to dry. It´s like adding chili to a meal. A little gives more flavour but ad to much and soon everything will taste of it and basicly ruin the meal.

[@ozzyperez3190]

Stone Age experts will never be beat by a rookie (as lucky as their dice may roll). I totally disagree about Stone Age being heavily luck dependent.

[@rogerx1258]

It is definetly to much for my taste. Even if you start to manage the luck in the game better with experience it still puts me off.

[@ozzyperez3190]

Interesting

[@cmelo4757]

Thank you.

[@cthulwho8197]

When did thumbs down become a Dice Tower thing?

[@andreasglantz2294]

It seems kinda meh, but I prefer World Without End over Pillars of the earth so maybe I would like this too.

[@tombosco6238]

I totally disagree on a lot of your opinions on this game, especially about too much luck. Sam made the most logic. Despite not having read the novel, I thought there's several interesting mechanics that played well with its theme. I played it at least a few times though before I gave it a thumbs up.

[@brandobond]

Think I'll skip it and keep waiting for the Pillars of the Earth reprint.

[@EclecticCamel]

PotE sucks.

[@brandobond]

I haven't played it but have been wanting to get it for a long time as the dice tower crew regularly praise it and It is on the top of many peoples' lists of "grail games" (games that are really hard to get but coveted). I think it is just supposed to be a really solid worker placement with some unique mechanisms (that haven't been replicated in other games since) and great production value. Maybe check out Tom Vasel's review to see what he likes about it.

[@chrismusix5669]

I've never played PotE either. People seem to like it well enough. But there's just so many great games available to be bothered with only 'decent' games.

[@wizo656]

Wait no more, dear sir! PotE reprint is available as we speak.

[@wizardryuk]

I am with brandobond on this. I too have been waiting for ages for the re-print of pillars. I have never fully understood the appeal but so many people praise it extremely highly that it feels to be a must have. But these comments are giving me mixed feelings again so I will need to research some more again before buying. But I was always under the impression it was a GREAT game and not just a 'decent' game as Chris Musix mentions below.

[@StefanLopuszanski]

No offense and with all due respect, STICK TO WRITING BOOKS, sir. There perfectly acceptable! :-P

[@simonmounsey4191]

Follett didn't make the game. Michael Rieneck (a renowned designer) did. Just fyi...

[@StefanLopuszanski]

I know. My comment is a joke in response to Zee's comment at 1:11

[@davidmaynor2855]

Tom... quit covering your face while filming.... that is all. ;)

[@bricelory9534]

It seems like a pretty bleh game. Resource trading with heavy luck doesn't really jive for me.