Arcs - Board Game Review - Game Of The Year? Is it Really?

[@mihaidiaconescu7060]

I will be honest, I used to not like your style in the past and even if sometimes it seems that you're complaining too much, the more I watch your reviews the more I begin to appreciate them. I might not agree with you always but you bring something unique to the palette of board game reviewers. The fact that this is not your full time job is also very impressive! Keep up the good work!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Fair enough! :P Thanks!

[@josephlastname6240]

Great video, thank you! I appreciate that you are not afraid of call out negatives you see in a game despite the hype. I was getting similar negative vibes from watching other people's videos about it but they were very subtle or not mentioned (reading between the lines). I know you are not against liking a hyped game if it is good. Eg, I remember all the hype about Ark Nova with people saying their #1, dice tower, etc. I watched your video with all the positives and negatives then decided to go for it and it is now one of my top games. There are some games you don't like that I do (and that is okay - this is the beauty of gaming). But you explain what doesn't work for YOU and why other people might infact like it still. So THANK YOU! Keep up the good work!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Such a good comment to read, thank you so much!

[@ganAlexander]

Time will tell… whether a game is popular, whether a game is good

[@ryankirkpatrick8062]

Agreed. With any review having a consistent take on a game style or mechanic is important and Luke does a great job. If he doesn’t like game type a, no matter how many iterations of game type a come out he consistently doesn’t like it, but is honest about it. Sometimes I think he gets a little too nitpicky to fill time but usually sums up it up perfectly. Luke keep it up. You kick the tires and give games a good test drive and you know where games typically have problems and because you value our time as much as your own I really appreciate how you factor that into the review. Sure game X might be the greatest game of all time but is it worth 4 hours? Keep up the great work

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

@@ryankirkpatrick8062 trust me I ain't filling time, if there wasn't so much detail required I'd happily do it in 15 minutes 😂

[@mikaeki5245]

Very much agreed to OP.

[@zirkvandenberg7776]

In the four or so weeks since getting this game, it got played six times. I own many games that never saw a fourth or fifth play. I played with my adult son and his mate one evening. (Both very experienced gamers.) Got a phone call in the morning, asking if we could do it again. And we did. For us, this is definitely the best game we've encountered in some years.

[@larrytedmcbride]

I really appreciate your "regardless of the consequences" reviews, mate. I may not always agree but I always know you're legit. Keep'em coming. So, I had suspicions that the hype for this game was to good. While, it may be a great game, I can see where it may fall short of my own likes and expectations.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Many thanks!! 😍

[@Nwolf5555]

My wife never forgave sit down for not reviewing Robinons Crusoe Adventures on Cursed Island and simply saying "It wasnt for us"... turns out that was because of the COVER ART (they found it sexist). There was nothing wrong with the game and she didnt pick it up. Once she realised how good it was she had to wait a half a year for it to be in stock. :D Wife also loved the cover art!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Cover art was sexist?! What the hell?! You mean the Z-Man cover right? Oh dear lord, people just make a molehill out of the silliest things. Oh well glad you finally got it and enjoy it!

[@francescodefilippis9384]

I'm so done with channels like SUSD or no pun included...I don't need to hear people telling me how good they are at social commentaries about boardgames and how they are so much better than us for liking or disliking something according to their ethics. And just please note, I'm saying this as a leftist.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

@@francescodefilippis9384 Agreed, no place for that and it puts me right off.

[@FalkFlak]

@francescodefilippis9384 What rubs me the wrong way with those two channels is that they - while in good intent - come across as they teach to the plebs some new discoveries about empathy and solidarity. While for everyone else with a normal education these are basic concepts and common knowledge. "today we found out, this game is about colonialism. And colonialism was bad" - "You dont' say :-O".

[@francescodefilippis9384]

@@FalkFlak if it were just that, it would be fine. The real issue emerges when these people, who are influential in boardgaming, come and "denounce" a game for covering a "problematic" topic in a way that,in their own personal opinion, is not "respectful" enough,and they'll rant about it for 2/3 of the review, assuming their point of view is absolutely right. And they are able to basically make or break the success of a game.

[@PhilCunliffe]

I'm a fan of the hand randomization, it forces thinking outside the box. If I'm all set up for tycoon but don't get a card to declare the ambition I might think, ok I have fuel and materials to spend that means I am extremely mobile and can build as prelude actions, I should spend this chapter expanding, or building up my army and go for warlord. If I could always declare what I was best suited for I would just declare tycoon every round and win, it would get boring. My biggest complaint with the game so far is just how "brutal" it is, it can definitely cause conflict at the table. With the right group of players though I think it's pretty damn amazing.

[@HoudiniSplicer]

Hello there, as a big fan of Cole's work and design style, I don't regard many of your negative points as negative, but just as designed, however it is only fair to state them for people who are not yet familiar with this approach, which needs specific mindset to enjoy, I think. Similar to Oath, this game is surely not for everyone. Although it is far more approachable and cleaner, I would say. After all, the base game is "just" distilled core of what was meant to be the base game before it became the Blighted Reach expansion. But there are few points you make, which don't seem fair to me. First the downtime and length of play in general. In my so far experience it is nor long nor downtime-ish, quite the opposite. The feel of the play seems pretty fast and snappy and in this context I just can't agree that the 2-3 h playtime is slog or too much, when game like Arnak (which I also love) takes me approximately the same time. This is especially in stark contrast when compared to Oath, where the downtime is so much worse. I love Oath as well, but as a person who tends to AP a lot, damn, it's sometimes a killer. Second thing, I don't agree with that "what you get in the box isn't worth the money quality and quantity wise" statement. I can't think of any concrete arguments for this, but just quickly compering it to other games on the market, I just don't think this statement is true or fair. Although I agree that leaders and lore pack could be part of the box and not sold separately. And last but not least the "average" scoring. This is just semantics, but I just don't think this game deserves that, "Not for me" I would totally understand, but average...I just don't think it is. Of course that is just my subjective opinion. Anyway take care and have a nice day :)

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Woot! The troll disliker only took 30 seconds this time to skip to the end and see it wasn't a 10/10 rating! Thanks for contributing to the algorithm! :D

[@toon_tabletop]

Great review. I enjoyed your fair assessment. One thing I do think you didn't totally sell was the prelude actions. They are definitely the way to control bad hands. If you really need to construct but you can't because you don't have the suit - it might mean you have Tax cards. That way you can collect some cubes in order to build with those

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

I did forget about prelude actions but they are still dependant on you having resources available, they help but aren't always enough.

[@justinvamp15]

Its interesting to hear a runaway leader as a negative. Ive played 6 or 7 times and never once have seen a runaway leader. In fact weve actually seen multiple times that a player who was in last or second to last have huge scoring bursts in chapters 4 or 5 due to the points ramping. It is basically impossible for a player to be able to compete for all 5 ambitions, and since the players determine which ones are in play its very possible to play keepaway. Sure you might have a huge fleet and a million trophies, but the other players can just go for Empath and suddenly it doesnt do much for them. This game has led to some of the craziest and most exhilirating comebacks out of any game Ive ever played! Could be a player group thing for sure

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

That person with the trophies should be setting up Warlord ASAP as first thing. Granted they might get unlucky and not draw the right card.

[@justinvamp15]

@TheBrokenMeeple definitely true! That's why keeping the initiative away from them is super important, at least so that by the time they can get initiative and declare, it's worth much fewer points. Totally might be my playgroup that doesn't have the runaway leader problem, loved hearing your thoughts!

[@stephendampier4560]

@@justinvamp15 I agree with your point about runaway leader. I made an earlier comment about my group had to gang up on someone who got within 1 point of winning in chapter 2!

[@darrenmcguire7808]

I have played it twice (3p) and there has been a runaway victory in both games in chapter 3. I think the game is very brittle and has to be approached in the same way by all players i.e. identify and bash the leader. If anyone in a 3 player game just tries to do their own thing it kills it.

[@justinvamp15]

@darrenmcguire7808 Yeah I mean the only way to score is by competing for goals that you as a table choose, so doing your own thing is a recipe for disaster

[@christopherbristow5957]

It's interesting to hear this perspective and I found the length and luck elements a bit much also. However, you didn't really talk about the prelude element. I have only played twice, but I found that when luck wasn't going my way in the second game, I used the prelude actions a lot more than I did in the first, and it did help balance the luck aspect... but still not quite enough!

[@shatnershairpiece]

I figured I wasn’t a Cole fan even before opening root. I then sold it and a 4 expansions sealed after staring at them for 8 months deciding if it was worth even attempting at two players. It was not. Very rare for me to sell a sealed game but in this case, I was happy to get rid of them. Thanks for making me avoid ARCS as well.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Glad it was helpful!

[@mrsteve4569]

I never disagree with someone for their personal likes and dislikes. I despise Terraforming Mars. It just doesn’t click with me, but apparently, from what I have been told, I’m wrong in my dislike. Based on your review, I will disagree with your assessment of some of the mechanics. IMO, too many people focus too much on their cards and what they cannot do that turn or round as opposed seizing opportunities presented to them by pivoting that round. The game mitigates bad card draw. In fact, it’s a core element to the game, and it rewards creative thinking. I have zero issue in burning a card to seize initiative. Many feel it’s a hinderance in losing a turn, but considering your opponents will do the same, it equals out in the end. People don’t want to declare an ambition because they don’t want to lost the initiative. Cool, I’ll do it. Initiative is important, but folks are too afraid to lose it. Wait, my opponent wants to declare X? Oh, well, let me declare something different because he waited too long because he was afraid to lose initiative or he wanted to ensure he was going to win it. Sucks to be him and to have wasted an entire chapter. I can’t follow suit or surpass? Well, let me use these materials in a prelude to build, or this fuel to move, or this weapon to attack. I’m constantly reminding new players about prelude actions since they get too focused on their cards. You get up to six turns per chapter and there are five chapters = 30 turns. With initiative changing hands, in most games, every player will get right around the same number of actions (not turns). Most board games are right around 30 turns or less. The key (or puzzle if you will) to this game is maximizing each of those precious few turns, especially since you’ll either lose the total number of turns or be limited to one action on many turns, and players need to figure out how to squeeze in the maximum number of actions in that finite number of turns. Again, this system may not click with everyone. I don’t care for Ark Nova, and as I have been told, I’m wrong. However, for those whom this game clicks, it truly is a gem.

[@RaduStanculescu]

I loved the card game and absolutely hated the combat. I'll never play the game again due to roll to resolve, but if anyone makes other games that include trick taking / follow as a main action selection mechanism I will happily play them.

[@richardcrozier-jobber7502]

Steve EXACTLY my thoughts too when listening to the review and thinking how I have been playing. Burn a card is common in our games, take the initiative. Play a high card to keep it but with just a couple of pips on the card. Then play a 2 card, declare an ambition but at the same time use the four pips on the 2 card. Burning that one card is a pretty powerful thing to do. Much better than effectively playing two effective one pip cards. And PRELUDES - barely mentioned in the review but build a couple of cities, a good tax and your are in prelude heaven. Easy to use two or three a turn to make that one pip card sing. So often you will be doing more from preludes than you are from the cards especially if you can get some court card synergies going. Almost every play can be good if you think out of the box. The game really rewards smart play.

The issue it that sometimes you can't pivot, your cards and the board state won't allow you to score efficiently no matter how creative you are. Or you might have to destroy everything you built and hope that will allow you to switch to a different strategy fast enough. On the other hand, another player might just "luck into" an easy scoring position where all they have to do is declare their ambition and defend. If you play 3 players (4 is such a chore) it might be hard to actively balance things out. Fans of the game keep repeating to me "well every hand is a bad hand" like that's a genius design idea. If every hand is miserable why am I playing this game? And I say that as a Wehrle fan who loves Root, Pax Pamir and John Company.

[@lostboy5861]

I agree with you everyone is different and shouldnt be looked down on for thier preferences, I personally love terraforming mars but despise ticket to ride and dont understand the hype behind it but my little brother cant get enough of it !

[@LCS213]

I enjoyed playing the game but I think the negatives called out here are spot on and exactly my thoughts as well.

[@lucasespejo5498]

Same here. Played it and have the exact same thoughts. My only disagreement is that I actually like the art, everything else is 100% on point

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

@lucasespejo5498 Art certainly is subjective for this one, totally cool with it being great for many.

[@grepbeer]

the spaceballs scene during the explanation of the lack of a catch up method was hilarious! Have not played it yet but I would tend to agree. There is a lot of competition. I have been enjoying Pamparo a lot.

[@Stevojay]

Cole Velah 😂 he’s American- it’s “Whirlee” (his other company is a clue [Whirlee] Wehrlegig games). And the company is pronounced “Leader”. That being said- love your candid thoughts as ever!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Thanks for clarification!

[@greghinzmann]

The ARCS review I’ve been waiting for. Thanks!

[@mike_howes]

Fantastic review. Really enjoyed the nuance of knowing this is a great game for a niche but not to be enjoyed by all and explaining why that is the case.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Hence this video needed a ton of time to get that across! Thanks and good to know it succeeded.

[@HeyImBode]

RE: time issue, i have played with slow players and it's such a bizarre clash to see it happen. Yes I understand every group I've seen essentially learns to walk in the 1st two chapters, yes I understand people are faced with two major hurdles #1 getting over not being able to do what you wanted/hope to do #2 wrestling with the card play is genuinely mind bendy, tactical and hard to parse in a way that feels efficient. But at the same time, so many turns will be single actions, and quick actions at that. And so much of the game presents you with uncertainty, it feels to me like that speeds up how it's best played. I have a fork of decisions, I don't know what's gonna be better. Let's just send it and see what happens. And if it blows up in my face, we'll slash an hour off the game and might even be able to table it again. I'm aware this comes off a bit selfish of how others engage with a game, but I also can't help but feel as if it contributes in creating a self-imposed pain point when approaching it this way. This isn't even just with Arcs, but with a lot of 1st time plays on a new game. Although player conflict games with luck involved probably suffer even more from this. Sloppy but pacy plays are so much fun.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

You mentioned one important quote there "let's just send it and see what happens" - this is not a common mentality among Euro gamers. I personally always go by that philosophy though, not dwelling too long about my turns.

[@HeyImBode]

The designer commented on game time and reports from 4-5 hours games of this on TTS vs. what they observed. Here's the unedited comment "I think this is further compounded by the fact that Arcs really asks players to deal with lots of different types of uncertainity. Looking around at most modern games, I don't think this is an area where a lot of modern players have much practice. So you toss this game to a bunch of newer players who haven't played many modern games, such as the 4 high schoolers I watched play a couple weekends ago, and they blast through the game in a little over an 90 minutes after I taught the game (for their first game!). But, if I toss this on the table for some Lacerda players, they are going to be cooking all evening." Bit of a chicken & egg situation, but I can certainly see how there's a ton of games these days where the size of the uncertainty is small. Or that you don't need to pre-occupy yourself with the uncertainty until it happens. It's hard to put it into words even if the observation seems right.

[@NLPIsrael]

@@HeyImBode also this game teaches fealing with uncertainty which we find in the real world so for some it can put in the self devlepmonet shelv

[@andrewstewart8475]

This video is exactly why Luke's channel is so great. The clear explanation of what he sees as the good and the bad, and the, open honest opinions on a hyped game he has spent his own money on, are invaluable. One does not have to agree but it is useful research of things to poke into more before making one's own decision. Much more helpful than 20 minutes of "wow this is amazing" fluff. Components and art are also important to me so, again, helpful to have some sort of assessment of this side of things.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

So glad to read kind comments such as yours, especially with some flack I've had (especially on BGG). :-) You get the idea of what I set out to do and I appreciate the support!

[@grantfraser5430]

I hadn't thought of Cole Wehrle (rhymes with early, I've been told) as having a kind of patterned design style but you're right. His games are well thought out and involved, requiring a thorough set of rules. I think he delivers again with Arcs but there are some minor quibbles as you pointed out. Root looks fabulous (own, never played) and to my thinking Oath is the ideal campaign game but I doubt I will ever buy or play it. Both need a niche set of players to regularly play. Quick aside, I wanted to mention I love SU&SD videos but yours are way more informative. Despite Root's lofty BGG ranking, I think Arcs is his best game because it's more approachable. Luck, sure. I'm happy to see weaker players win from time to time. A good rules teach is imperative to having new players understand and enjoy this game. The biggest idea to get across, and it's not made clear from the rules, the actions you get from action cards are almost secondary. With resources and some Guild cards, Prelude actions are the bulk of your turn unless on lead. And the main function of lead is to declare an ambition if needed. By the way, what player count do you think is best for the game? I like 3 for learning, 4 if you can find hard core enthusiasts. Two players is a different beast in my opinion, not that interested personally. When all is said and done, good review even though I think the negatives are worth overlooking. It will still possibly win a GOTY award somewhere, not underservedly, but there are better games out there.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

I think you said it yourself! - i share your views on each count.

[@johngolf]

25:53 if I ever buy this game, i'll surely have a house rule : same as in Inis, get cards, pass 2 to the left, then one. Do it a second time, then play. Would allow to have some control and actually building some strategy.

[@WatchersPod]

I think the big difference between you and SUSD regarding taste, I just looked at your top 10 games 2021,23,24. You had a lot low interactive games and non of the interactive game were. I just went over your whole top 100 and even CE, a game you did talk about in the past isn’t there(maybe I missed it). But you obviously not a fan of conflict heavy game like Hansa, El Grande, Some dudes on a map I won’t mention. So if I’m looking for a high interaction game, you are probably not the best reviewer for it. SUSD on the other hand did have reviews and have many recommendations for high interaction conflict games.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Some high interaction games are still fun though even if not on my top 100. Also any reviewer should be willing to go outside their comfort zone, SUSD I would argue do not, after all Tom is a devout Cole fan.

[@WatchersPod]

@@TheBrokenMeeple I agree I’m not saying it’s bad for you to review the game. I would just say it paints the review in a different color. If I played mostly heavy modern euros. Than I would be more inclined to listen to your review. I would also take into account that Tom loves this designers game a lot. Though at least in his John Company review. He did couch it a lot and said a lot of people he played with didn’t. Overall though their channel does feature a lot more of these types of games. And it is a bit harder understanding the criticism coming from a guy knowing this is at the very least. Less his type of game.

[@hunorheim2766]

​@@WatchersPod that's why it's not just the final rating what matters, but the full discussion about the game. Let's be honest here, reviews are always, always subjective, because you are speaking about your own experience. No matter how hard you try to be objective, you just can't 100%. But if you listened closely, he said that, if you like the type of games like Root, Pax Pamir etc, then jump on it, because you will like it.

[@WatchersPod]

@@hunorheim2766 I am not sure that’s even true. I haven’t played those game. So it might be. I’m not even sure how much he did but you are correct I never said another opinion isn’t valid all of them are colored in a way. I’m just saying for me it’s hard to know how much of his objections are valid if I can see based on his top 100 he doesn’t like these types of game. Doesn’t matter the designer.

[@LeeKenshin7]

​@@WatchersPodThat's why it's important as a consumer you know whose taste you align with the most. Regardless, I do appreciate Luke's in-depth reviews because they seem very thorough and balanced. However, I don't need a review to know that this in-your-face, extremely tactical game is not for me.

[@Puzzu]

Great review, any time an overhyped game comes out, I count on your channel for tackling it to give us both the positives and negatives. Appreciate it.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Fantastic to hear, thank you very much! :-) I get a solid mix of positive and negative feedback, but it's great to read stuff like this!

[@jamesblanton4143]

While I'll need more plays to form an opinion, I get what you are saying about not having the right cards at the right time (that happened to me in my first play). It seems to be more of a make lemonade out of the lemons you get type of game. Stellar turns are still possible but you will definitely have turns where you are wasting a card.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

And wasting any turns in this is pretty damaging, not to mention a chunk of downtime potential.

[@wmarclocher]

3:00 Oh, does your take on Root reflect your take on COIN games in general too?

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

I don't go crazy for COIN games but they are just a genre that isn't for me really. It's a very niche genre anyway and at least it knows that.

[@ourfamilytogether]

I don’t think I’d ever heard you talk about Root before. I know that you love Hegemony and I’m surprised you don’t like Root because it has that same “4 factions, each compeltely different” thing that COIN games have.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

I don't play many COIN games at all though. Hegemony has 4 separate players and certainly it's rules intensive as a result, BUT the factions overlap a lot more in Hegemony as they interlink together with what you're doing. In Root, the Woodland Alliance for example functions completely differently from Vagabond for example.

[@jamescartwright1150]

Excellent review as always Luke. This game seems to be everywhere at the moment. Recently watched the Dice Tower playthrough of it and it took them 45 mins just to teach the rules that plus its certainly not family friendly and has not solo means its definitely not a game for me.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

It's not family friendly in the slightest and even though 45 minutes is overly long to teach this, it's still susceptible to rules checking. 2 of those players reviewed the game though so I'm surprised the rules teach was hard.

[@Astianax27]

I was on the fence for this game, thanks for the review, I know now that’s it’s not for our group

[@chillionaire7114]

I've had a genuinely great time following all the ARCS coverage on KZbin. There are just too many games releasing that are iterations / refinements on games that are already out there. That's fine, no issue with those games existing and continuing to inch the hobby forward, but too often the "final thoughts" on a game are one of two things: "this is good/great, but if you already have XYZ game, do you really need this also?" or, "this is good/great, and I can't see myself wanting to play XYZ game anymore because I now have this". ARCS has not followed that mold. Clearly a love it or hate it, but either way, it's been a lot of fun listening to people's play experience with this game. I also think most of the coverage on this game has been honest (at least within the list of content creators I've chosen over the years to continue following; which does include SU&SD). Maybe SU&SD went a little crazy using the term game of the year in what... June/July - but the actual content of their video felt honest and did a good job of also highlighting what could turn people off of this game. There just needs to be a level of responsibility on the buyer of understanding what a game is about; what games they enjoy; and then making an educated purchasing decision. Either way - thanks for making the investment in picking up this game, and getting more honest thoughts out there to help in educating all of us.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

They went with that title to get the views in. Thanks for your thoughts.

[@jakubhruza1229]

Would drafting solve the card randomness problem? Nothing easier than adding a draft... Or would it break anything?

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

It would solve it i bet but you'd have to shorten the game by a chapter to compensate for the added length.

[@npckse8508]

when this game hits retail and bounces off of a ton of different gaming groups, I predict we will see it drop some in the reviews and ratings. I think based on what this game is, the hyped super positive reviews are going to leave a ton of folks confused when the game drops on their table.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

That's what worries me with the SUSD effect and hype train - I played with 9 unique people, only 2 of them would go out and get the game "maybe". The rest bounced off and 3 of them said they "expected a lot more"

[@benlauson555]

One of these days there'll be the Broken Meeple effect, you just wait Luke. Great Review I appreciate the honesty and bold tellings.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

He he I wonder how that effect will work!

[@djtarquin]

I think many of your points are valid, but those elements you dislike are intentional. I really enjoyed this game and your dislikes are not an issue for me. The length is not an issue for me, it is no longer than 90% of the games i play. (GWT, Ark Nova, Underwater Cities, Nucleum, Hegemony...) I wonder if your review has a touch of wanting to go against the crowd? Surety you can see why people like the game, even if it's not your cup of tea.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Those games you just mentioned don't have a ton of chaos/luck factor within them compared to Arcs, nor are they anywhere near as brutal (well GWT NZ isn't anyway). 3 hours of an easy-going Euro is different from 3 hours for a chaotic game where you're beaten upon relentlessly.

[@Airbot80]

@@TheBrokenMeeple GWT, Ark Nova, Underwater Cities, Nucleum, Hegemony none of this games are easy-going Euro. 3 hours in chaotic game passes fast, 3 hours on a hard-going euro, the ones you refer, sometimes seems it passed "years". Overall your review seems to be saying bad things just for say. most times you say things are overhyped, but at the same time this game is only good for a niche group of people. If that was the case, the game does not get overhyped. Gets no hype at all, since the voices saying its good would be so few...

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

3 hours in a chaotic game is no faster than another 3 hour game. It's just less controllable.

[@dcrbdh]

I didn't care for Oath, and I am mostly meh of Root. I haven't played the others. I do like this game, but it had to grow on me. I do agree that card drafting would be helpful, but it might make the game longer. 3 player games tend to go 1.5 hours - 2 hours. It is highly tactical, I think that's why I like it. Also I dont have to know the ins and outs of all other factions to win the game.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Yeah if you add drafting, you need to max the game at 4 chapters.

[@21cabbage93]

Been waiting for an unbiased review to actually express advantages and disadvantages instead of just saying “Wow! Cole Wehrle has done it again!” So thankyou for that

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

You're welcome! Thank you!

[@FatherLizard]

I don’t think unbiased means what you think it means.

[@Static442]

​@@FatherLizardseems to be the standard term used for any reviews that are negative nowadays

[@mikaeki5245]

Yeah, constructive criticism is almost forbidden nowadays.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

@@mikaeki5245 Tell me about it!!

[@nadavgordon3310]

First, thank you for a very informative on-the-table evaluation of the game experience, it really helps as a genuine up close review so you know what you're getting into. A question though: seems to me like this short blanket scenario of trick taking is so intentional that it moves the players to stuff like negotiations and a higher level meta game, did you experience that in your sessions of Arcs?

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Nope. But then I wouldn't have played enough games with the same group to warrant a meta forming. As for negotiations - no not really. I mean, if they can screw you over and get a cool reward, you have nothing to barter with.

[@Oaklestat]

I haven't played it, but from what I watched, I kind of expected that I would think the same as you. Thanks for the in-depth thoughts.

[@monoludico6166]

3:13 "practical" games tend to bore me to death: gazillions of worker placement, card drafting, etc, etc., out there on the market, most of which end feeling so "samey". Thankfully, for me, Cole Wherle's games exist (favorite board game designer btw). Appreciate your honesty as a reviewer, nonetheless.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Appreciate the reasoned debate :-) Clearly this game will speak to you if you haven't tried it yet.

[@odditie]

I think this is like other games by Cole that they are very interesting to watch than to play. I find the twists and turns in his games fascinating and epic. I don’t think I would enjoy playing them nearly as much.

[@NLPIsrael]

it is complicated game, this is true. but in minute 27 you are wrong - you can tax materials and this helps you build what you need or go for influece or use psionics, i some game i was attacked i was left with only 5 ships sactterd so i used the fuel cards that let me have 4 fuel in one time and all my ships with bad situation took away enemy fleet and went to his adjacent city and damaged the star port - so it was a gamble move that worked, but its true you need to reealy understand what is happening and how to utilise your resources - the problem is its hard for new players to learn and be good at it before 4 5 games at least...

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

It does not take 4 games to learn the basics of this one. Fans are really overblowing the complexities of the gameplay in this.

[@lenakimarctaedius3056]

i like cole’s games very much though i understand that they are not for everyone. they can have some barrier to entry. even though i appriciate your honest opinion and enjoyed your review it felt like you had made up your mind before the review. i agree this is not cole’s best game, in my opinion. they tried to streamline it and the reason i like cole’s games is they are not streamlined but allowed to be it’s own thing. and is was not enough asymetric for my tyste. but it was still a wonderful game. the best game of 2024, i would not be surprised. thank you luke for carrying on.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Hmm, not sure I'd want them to make this one more complicated, other than maybe drafting cards and maxing at 4 chapters.

[@Boardgametherapist]

Hoping there’s a solo mode developed in the future.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

I feel it would be a complicated affair to replicate.

[@Boardgametherapist]

@@TheBrokenMeeple didn’t they hire Ricky Royal? And Liz Davidson? I have faith in them haha

[@darrenmcguire7808]

I enjoy the game but it has been tuned too tightly. I think it would play better if some of the restrictions were relaxed e.g. I think receiving 7 cards and having to keep one for the next round would allow you to plan/pivot and this would open up the full game.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

There's no way to pivot in this game without seriously damaging yourself.

[@darrenmcguire7808]

​@@TheBrokenMeepleI think that kills the theme (not that it's too present to start with), the actions are relatively thematic but it's the why. It kinda feels like you are running around like a headless chicken if you don't have a good hand. I think the luck of the draw, the constant tension and take that nature of the game is more suited to a 1hr game. It feels a bit much when this is applied to a 2.5 to 3.5hr game. Going to give it another few games to see where I land on this one

[@meewarwoowoo]

The Venn Diagram of "I didn't like the action selection" and "Arcs is bad" is an eclipse.

[@CarlosRodriguez-ez3ls]

Great review Luke! You are one of a precious few boardgame critics that provides an honest and unbiased opinion (even if I don't always agree, ahem Barrage). Thx!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Much appreciated!

[@Tabletop_AshleyRose]

Hi Luke! I've been a bit MIA lately but know I'm still watching your vids. You're awesome, thanks for the review

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Welcome back! :-) Oh man, I ain't touching the campaign - and if the campaign is needed to make the game good, that isn't a good mark on the original game - especially with how pricey the campaign was.

[@DashyDino_is_back]

A fair review. I really enjoy Cole’s games but I was surprised by the hype ! GOTY no it’s as you say far too brutal for most people. It’s my sort of game but I would only play it with other people that have experience of playing Cole’s other games! I’m enjoying it but my main gripe with the game is the quality of the board and components .

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Definitely built to a budget! Very happy to read "fair review" 🥰 thank you!

[@KimDahl77]

Did you try the leaders and lore variant?

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

From the get-go. It adds a little variety, but that's it.

[@PestiferousJoe]

Thank you for being a light in the darkness.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Ha ha, melodramatic but I'll allow it! :P

[@tonybowers9490]

Thanks for reviewing and sharing. ARCS doesn’t appeal to me. Although, I understand how some would like it a lot.

[@LTSJuicy]

Your critisms are fair. However, to me it is easily my game of the year, But i love Cole's games, high interaction games, tactical games. ARCS respects the players enough to keep each other in check with no need for a catchup mechanic. Ive played several games of this and your are always in contention for victory even if you get knocked out early. Obviously this required an advanced understanding. This game also rewards mutliple plays evenually you start grasping the concepts and possible interactions. It is definitely not for the faint of heart or for the person that has to play the new hotness every week. Thanks for your take. Although i disagree.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

That's cool and I wish there were more Arcs fans like you. 👍 Ones that can disagree but see my point and not get all ragged about it. I've had to deal with a few bad apples but thankfully majority of Arcs fans have been nice and open minded.

[@LTSJuicy]

​@@TheBrokenMeeple All love brother. Keep em' coming! Love the content.

[@unlimitedrabbit]

Would you consider reviewing the Uwe Rosenberg two player game Oranienburger Kanal?

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

It's unlikely - I love Uwe, but 2 player only games are tricky for me to get played regularly as I go to groups.

[@IslanKleinknecht]

It is quite interesting seeing the mixed responses to this game. I'm finding it fascinating to try out on TTS, but I really can't tell if I "like" it.

[@Dash-si3en]

Great review! So glad you gave a balanced look at this game. I agree. It’s over hyped. I love root! But never felt drawn to any of the designer’s other games. This is a big pass for me. Thanks for saving me some money!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Totally agree!

[@stephendampier4560]

Thanks for reviewing, I was keen to hear your take on this. As somebody who owns Root (never got it to the table) but enjoys the app, hated my one play of John Company I was skeptical but I jumped on the hype train and managed to get a copy. Played 3 times with my group 3 & 4p. We typically enjoy euros but we all loved the game. Even the one who prefers solitaire puzzles. Personally it’s going to take me sometime to get used to being so tactical because I never played such a tactical game, normally I enjoy planning out in advance. Even game like ark nova have tactical elements but this like you said is nothing but tactics. Couple of things I disagreed with, our last game had one player get one point from winning in round 2 this resulted in a situation where the rest if us had to chat and agree to gang up on him so he couldn’t win the game and this led to some interesting discussions. So I do think there is room for working together when you need to. He ended up winning in the last chapter just by managing to grab a resource and getting second place. His fleets were battered to zero and he was sweating whether he would win. I do remember another player in round 1 thinking there is nothing I can do to then swing back into action the next round. You can get huge points swings in this game to pull you from the brink of a loss to win. Also the one agent on a card and then someone placing two…. Well that’s a bad move leaving one on a card to influence it’s asking for trouble. You didn’t mention the cool combos you can do with prelude actions eg use a psionic to copy and then relic to secure for example. For me it’s 9/10 not perfect but a hell of a lot of fun, the campaign expansion does look interesting but I doubt it would ever get to the table. We will be back playing euros next week anyway hahahaha

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

How did he get anywhere close to winning in Round 2? Even if all 3 ambitions were declared in both rounds and he won all 6 of them he wouldn't be 1 point away from the end game. And in any case, how the hell did you let him win all 6 ambitions at that point? As for the agent thing, well if you only have one action, it's all you can do. If not, then well the card is essentially useless aside from "tax one planet".

[@constChg]

@@TheBrokenMeeple u might have missed the built city bonus power?

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

You mean the extra points you earn if you build all of them? It's never missed, it just never sticks around long enough to be a thing. You can't physically defend that many cities, so at least 1-2 of them should be getting raided - though granted they won't go back to your board until Warlord scores, but I would expect that they would be scoring it. And even then, I go back to asking how a group of players let one person not only empty his board of cities but also win 3 ambitions a round to score that many points.

[@stephendampier4560]

@TheBrokenMeeple in the expansion there is a leader card that gives you an extra city instead of a starport in the variable setup so he didn’t have to put as many cities out. In the first chapter he scored 7 points and the second chapter he got 1st in two ambitions (not 3) and scored 19 points 5 + 5 for first and 4+5 for first in another

[@stephendampier4560]

Even if they are destroyed like you say they can sit on a players board so easily can score. If people aren’t going after raiding cities because don’t have the cards or trying other things then it’s possible. This feeds into the seizing initiative giving up a turn to get the initiative is huge as you will sacrifice a turn but could get +3 more actions combined with preludes u can do a lot of damage and this wasn’t done nearly enough in our early games

[@kylemeighan1143]

Nice review. This game doesnt interest me much, yet i keep hearing how great it is. Much of what you say confirms my impressions from what i have seen. If somebody else owns it and asks me to play, I'll give it a shot, but I'm not running out to get this one. Thanks.

[@andraklassinvandrare]

I'm yet to play the game, but 1. Huge Wehrle fan 2. Love brutal punishing game. So, perfect for me!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Excellent, I think you'll love it then! :-) Good luck!

[@rain1224]

I REALLY like you giving the comments of other people who played, that's very telling that this is a niche game

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

It varies how often I do that, but for this kind of game that I felt was very niche and to combat the hype train I felt it was necessary. Might try to incorporate it a bit more in future though.

[@loves2tinker]

The the thing that seem disingenuious when some one claims game of the year is the lack of context. I'm sure Arcs is a decent game, but the way it was released with practices like leaving out leaders and lore is kind of a money grab. They could have added $10 to the game and done deal, reduced packaging. This is the same kind of consumerism which happened with the Dune Imperium game. Thank you Luke for doing meaningful reviewdls.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

They didn't even need to add $10 - it's like 15 cards or something - why not have everyone say "wow this is such great value" instead of milking the fans? And yes Dune is the same. You're welcome thanks!

[@AttilaPolgar-x6i]

The "random" in this game is not random, it is chaotic and that player win who can control and dominate the chaos. I think, there is a third type of the fan of this game, the "chaos seeker".

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Which typically I wouldn't associate with Cole's other games, but it's another way of putting it.

[@thinusconradie4297]

This really helps to offer a balanced overall review in conjunction with others.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Thank you!

[@kroomiester]

Completely agree with this review! I felt a lot of the negative feelings you brought up. I am normally a fan of Cole’s games, Root and Oath are pretty enjoyable for me. I believe the have a much stronger strategy element to them than arcs though, and I don’t often feel trapped by my available actions in those games. Arcs didn’t give me the freedom to dig myself out of a hole, where Oath and Root often do.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Certainly Root I know has more ability to bring yourself back.

[@markbowser3978]

Drawing a very strange and obtuse hand of cards is my greatest joy in this game :)

[@iansutton7416]

Yes, no love for SUSD here. A shame that Paul left, as he seemed to keep the ego in check. Matt also seems a very earnest person as well. The fundamental issue for me (and one to be fair I have issues with your own coverage) is that they spend too much effort telling people whether they should like a game or not, rather than starting from the position of informing viewers in order to equip / inform them to make their own decision. True, not as bad as stable-mate Efka (NPI), but nonetheless I find their coverage less useful than others who aren't as strident / goofy. As for the game, simply not my genre, so it was an easy pass without giving it much thought. The level of take that simply way too much for my style of gaming. Presentation / player aids looks decent. The card play twist doesn't feel at all engaging to me. I also do like games that ask for tactical flexibility, over one where it rewards a blinkered/focused implementation of a strategy. I even feel ok with a degree of randomness, albeit much prefer if that's about players 'playing the odds'. I'd also be more tolerant of random luck in a tactical game vs. a deeply strategic game which asks me to plan 2-3 turns ahead, only to have that work destroyed by luck.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Someone kept the ego in check? :P All reviews are essentially giving people the chance to make their own decision. Hell the end of the verdict tells people to ascertain what group they fall into before they decide if they want the game or not. You can't get much more on the mark than that ;-)

[@chadvader974]

I feel like im in a lecture when listening to a SU and SD video, a long boring monologue.

[@superdux1997]

Thankyou for a great review. Your conclusion is brilliant. I love the look of this game, i get caught up on the look and hype of games, and often end up dissapointed. As neither a big leder games fan or a fan in your face aggressive games..... I think youve helped me make the sensible choice!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Thank you for the kind words! Sadly the fans of Arcs won't see it that way!

36:00 before this I watched video where reviewer had only 3 chapter games (that ended early) and he clearly wasn’t blind. I’m just saying.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Said or did on screen?

@ “said”, there was no videos as far as I know. Do it matters?

[@nirszi]

I thought I'm gonna hate this game because of the cutthroat nature of it but thanks to your detailed review, I realize there are multiple reasons I'd dislile it.

[@MrSkippingpig]

Interesting review, but maybe invest in a better mic? Sounds like you're coming to us live from the downstairs toilet.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Mic is a Rode VideoMic Pro, it's already a decent mic, only possible upgrade is a shotgun microphone that extends much further out, but they cost more than a social gamers budget.

[@asqik]

I think that this game feels so lucky for those who didnt dive into the game deep enough, but I understand not everyone would be willing to. The only actual luck element that seems irritating are the raid dice, but thats how the dice should work in the first place. This game is very brutal and it is CERTAINLY not for those who dont enjoy that aspect in their games. But this game is made very swingy and you certainly can comeback without a construction, this game feels like a roller coaster and I think it was designed like that. Good review, but I disagree with many points.

[@j_atkinson]

Thanks for bringing us back to reality and giving the game a fair shake :) I'm still probably going to get this because a lot of still sounds good, but at least I've been fairly warned!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Hope you enjoy it!

[@TheSludgeMan]

I completely agree about the art. I don't think the cutesy sketches work with the theme and the board is dull as dishwater. I'm sure I'd enjoy it but the hype is so OTT... People are playing one game and declaring it a masterpiece

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

I'd say they play it a bit more, but man, the fans do want to convince the world it's a masterpiece. When in fact it's fine but a very niche game so trying to convince the world it's amazing won't work.

[@frc1255]

Don’t prelude actions mitigate card draw?

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

If you have the spare resources, but if you are spending stuff that you need to win the goal in the first place then you are basically hindering yourself. Plus there will be a player elsewhere who doesn't have to worry about thar.

[@NLPIsrael]

@@TheBrokenMeeple for that you need overseer..double tax and bad guild cards you can use with leader who need to pay guild card to take initiatuve as their power. its hard and need lotsw of thinkg maybe too much..

[@francoisdg4495]

I'm with you on this one. I don't know why there's no card drafting in this game instead of just having the hand you're dealt. People who say that in the game you have to adapt to the hand they are dealt, do not understand that if a person is dealt the perfect hand for them, they will not lose any action to adapt and this can easily make all the difference. Losing a 3 hour game just because of luck is really a major irritant.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Yeah actually drafting would help. Yes it would make it longer but then shave off a chapter and don't make it 5 chapters - problem solved.

[@jonquill]

​@@TheBrokenMeeple I do like this game, and I will probably play with some kind of variant like that. Four chapters, and if you're not in the lead, draw seven cards and discard one.

[@Smeagol44]

The thing is that there isn't such a thing as "the perfect hand", for anyone, in any chapter. You might think you had the perfect hand, but anyone can change the course of the game, and declare ambitions you're weren't going for, undermining your plans, effectively making you have the need to adapt.

[@andyn2854]

If you want this game but drafting: Inis is absolutely the answer.

[@chadvader974]

I do like root, its not my fave. I do like John Company although nobody will play it with me F2F, so ill give this a whirl. Interesting review though I will bear it in mind while I play.

[@AirTails]

I really love this game, but respect for being honest. As you said it's kind of a particular type of game - much like nearly all of Cole's designs - where their innovations cause their fans (me, Tom of SUSD, etc) to want to yell from the heavens about how good it is, when in reality it's very Marmite. It reminds me of the movie Everything Everywhere All at Once, had a cult following who it resonated with deeply, but its hype reached a spilling point where it reached people who unambiguously did not care for its style or humour, and decry its Oscar. Thing is I dont particularly disagree with your criticisms either. I'm still getting to grips, and yes trying to reach the alleged nirvana of every hand being workable, and being more proactive with preludes and less afraid to seize initiative by force. I'm not sure I could put my finger on why exactly I want to keep coming back to it, though. I'm hit and miss with Cole, I love Root but don't care for the other releases so far - until Arcs.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

The perfect response! Someone who gets it! It's very much a marmite game and reasonable folk would understand that, but so many mega fans want to destroy any mention of critical review calling it the best design in history. 🙄

[@AirTails]

@@TheBrokenMeeple Haha, no I understand. My partner got it for me for Christmas because he knew how excited I was for it, but my gut response wasn't "this is the game of the year, we'll have so much fun!", it was "oh my word... I'm grateful, but I sure hope he can tolerate the meanness and randomness"! Thankfully we both enjoy it, but it's absolutely not something that I would expect to see unanimously decorating best of year lists. It's by far the easiest teach of Cole's games at least, but I feel his games are typically divisive since they often have meanness, king making, and a degree of players self-balancing baked in to the design which will never unify opinion (and all 3 are present here in Arcs). As it stands I think the only thing I'd like to change for me personally is some way to mitigate the randomness of your hand outside of relying on someone else to play what you don't have. The prelude actions are of course excellent for twisting things in your favour but you can never pre empt what you'll need exactly, and you don't have much resource storage. I'm currently trying to put more emphasis on the court cards whenever I play at the moment as I feel like they're often underestimated in overcoming those barriers.

[@ludwigmises]

I love the Spaceballs clip.

[@hubris1960]

Thanks for providing a more critical eye on Arcs. After playing it twice, I enjoyed it but I could not understand the crazy amount of hype when the game could be very mean and push some people away. I used to agree with the old guard of Shut Up and Sit Down but I don't think Tom and my opinions line up on games. At least they feel less sanctimonious than one of the reviewers they have occasionally collaborated with.

[@a-c-m]

I don’t think that Tom from SU&SD does actually play a wide variety of new games. I would be surprised if he played more than 15 new 2024 releases…

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

He has very distinct and focused desires in games. Anything outside of that probably hasn't been played or looked at much.

[@briankruger1484]

I totally agree with this! I love Tom’s reviews but his taste in games is very different to mine and (seemingly) the old guard of SUSD.

[@karstenszajner6043]

Nice review. I don't agree with the majority of your critiques, but glad to hear you had some fun with it. One point I do agree on is the board art. The planet designs on the boxes and cards are so interesting, it's sad to see the board not reflect those planet designs and instead go for a very flat, singularly colored approach. I think the design of the map works great mechanically, the art however doesn't really draw me in when I'm looking at the map. 9-9.5/10 otherwise for me. Love the high interaction and making plans on the fly. The system feels so innovative versus your standard table builder or area control game.

[@Original_Maverick]

Thanks for covering this one! I think I agree with your conclusions. From everything I have seen around, this is a game easy to table. For fans of Cole W, considering the scope of his other titles, I can appreciate such a thing being in demand. Gonna slate Arcs under "curious to try".

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

I can totally see a mini fan club, but the SUSD effect makes everyone think it's a must-buy.

[@GORYOUN]

Liked the review. Would be interesting to compare it with someone who plays card games (Bridge, Canasta etc) or wargames (who are more used to dice). The game is growing on me because it is different from a lot of other Euros but it is not in my top 10 games. Probably 50/50 as to whether I move it on at some stage

[@lukemayhew7113]

Hearing someone so relentlessly bash Ferrin's art was much funnier to me than I expected. Haha!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

I wouldn't say it's bashing.

[@lukemayhew7113]

​@@TheBrokenMeeple you said the art is a mismatch, looks like sketches from a child's book, and then asked if they ran out of budget for good artwork. I think it's fine to bash the art. It's subjective. Go for it. But after hearing dozens of people gush over his art, the whiplash from your 30 second teardown made me chuckle. Not a critique of you, I liked the review! I just found that part funny. :)

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

@lukemayhew7113 True, that aspect needed some bashing 😂 but his art does fine in other games that suit it more and finish the cards 😂

[@elahrairah9067]

Thank you for saving me money and time! It looks like a good game, but definitely not for my gaming group.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

No worries!

[@steveg9939]

Very good review Luke. It’s ok that this game isn’t for everybody. I gave it a look during the KS and decided to pass. It’s not for me but I do enjoy other games from Cole including JC 2nd edition. I don’t think it will win the award for « game of the year » but it definitely will be for many game groups and that’s also fine.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Indeed - all I hope is that people do their research from both good and bad sides and make the right choice for themselves.

[@Pokephantom]

I like the game but I see ALL of your points. You're my guy for reviews, my good lad, my strong bou, trusted confidant.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Love it!! Thanks!! :D

[@gcavrubio]

My issue with board games like Root is that, despite being good, they are too complex for paper implementations and would be more suitable for a videogame.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Couldn't agree more!

[@quentinavanzi9559]

There is a massive misunderstanding of what kind of game Arcs is. It is not an Action Resource Management game like Root, Terraforming Mars or most of the so-called "complex" board games of 2024. It is a 'jeu de plis' like tarot or belotte. They are much more common in Latin countries like France, but from Anglosaxon countries 90% of constructive criticism is based on this misunderstanding. You don't plan your action based on what you want to do on the board, but on the order of play (who leads and who has the last shot) and the number of cards left in each suit (only 4 suits and 7 cards, so it's super easy to count compared to tarot). If you play it like you describe, you'll never enjoy it because you don't understand what Arcs is, which is understandable from someone not familiar with games like Tarot that a lot of French ppl play since thay are 6 or 7yo. Cheers

[@veedeviceable]

I breathed a sigh of relief after watching this. I've always loved the idea and concept of Cole Wherle's games--an impressive amount of thought, historical context, and design consideration in each--but, for me, the plays have never lived up to the ideal/promise. I had been feeling like I missed the boat on this one, but this was a nice jolt of reality that articulated many of the same thoughts I've had about previous designs.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

His designs sadly don't work for me.

[@DTeazee]

Ironically, you bought this game at over retail because of hype caused by Shut Up and Sit Down haha. Can’t escape!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Ha ha I guess so, but at least I'm not forcing myself to like it as a result. I doubt I'll recoop most of my money though but hey, rather get review out now before retail release then too late.

[@skeleman4629]

this guy sees intentional line art done for a minimalist sketch look and immediately think it's cheap really screams contrarian for the sake of contrarian (and online attention), this being your first point in the "bad stuff" should be enough to see the intentions of this video.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

What position its in within the sequence of bad stuff makes no difference whatsoever and you fully well know that - that to me speaks of your comment as contrarian for sake of. If anything because aesthetics aren't as important in this case as the other bad parts, that's why it's done first, to get it out the way so your whole argument completely falls apart. Also I don't find minimalist sketch book art is adequate for a game like this - we live in an age where fantastic art can be found anywhere - no excuse to half ass it.

[@jacacent]

​@@TheBrokenMeepleKyle Ferrín art is one of my favorites out there and definitely a selling point for a lot of people, so yeah, there is actually an excuse to "half ass" it.

[@alessandrovigano8149]

Played it twice and cannot say I'm a fan mostly for yhe randomness involved. I don't mind some level of randomness but here it feels too high. And I love root, which is from the same designer

[@PaulTightbowFirellon]

Big fan of Root here, Played Arcs, both the base game and the campaign mode - and it always was a bit of a coin flip. Sometimes, great plays, dramatic swings of events and backstab are fun; sometimes, it feels like I've had 0 chance to do anything and simply have to sit through it until someone else wins without any realistic chance to succeed - or worse, that my friend had to do the same, without much competition at all. Among my friends, Root earned a much better reputation than Arcs for very similar reasons.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Even though I haven't quite gelled with Root, I would still play it over this.

I like your reviews, but i think this video came out unnecessarily negative. Feels a bit like you are fighting hype with antihype (in my opinion). In general I find Cole Wehrles closed economy designs really good. Unfortunately im broken playing dota for 20 years, so im insufferable playing aggressive boardgames. I would love to be able to play his designs more often. I only own john company 2nd ed, which is the one with open economy :( Didnt get to play it, but got to see few games of it at heavy cardboard and i cant wait. Its just so hard to get to the table.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

All contradictory opinions to hype are anti-hype. Such as the opposite of all matter is simply anti-matter! Be interested to hear what you think of John Comp soon.

[@daveheasman3680]

It was so inevitable you would not like this Luke….in your efforts to swim against the tide and push back against the hype, it does feel like you played this game wearing the opposite of rose tinted glasses. However tbf you do highlight a few positives, whilst magnifying and spending far more time on the negatives. It is a bit disingenuous to label anyone who watches a SUSD positive review and ends up buying the game as brainwashed. Whilst that was the initial catalyst I did a shed load of my own research on the game before taking the plunge.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

@@daveheasman3680 But it was the initial push right? ;-) Negatives take more time to explain than positives. It's easy to say something is great, but to say something isn't great requires more explanation as to why, because inevitably, people won't believe you until you go into detail and even then, probably still won't. That's just the nature of the internet.

[@johnphillips4733]

Bought the base game when it was briefly in stock (uk) I've opened it, but not punched anything yet. Love ROOT and OATH, but I'm not 100% on this.

[@jankogo]

I am probably gonna love this game since I love Root and Pax Pamir, but it seems like a niche game for sure.

[@pc3776]

I played my second game of this last night , and I honestly don't think it's for me. I got battered by the other 3 players and couldn't recover in time to get back in the game. The draws were not on my side. Three and half hours down and everyone except the winner was miserable playing it. I've experienced enough to know it's not for me

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Yeah people like to defend that you can pull it back, no way in hell can you.

[@kidney-vitoratio9312]

@@TheBrokenMeeple "No way in hell"? Melodramatic but I won't allow it. How do people praise your review for honesty? It just seems to be rank contrarianism.

[@simpler_times81]

Root is great IMO. I enjoy it at 2 players too, it's a fun way of playing with the different factions. Good with Hirelings too. Really didn't like Arcs, too much downtime, too random, theme didn't come through.

[@bryanstarke1313]

Thanks for the thoughtful review! Definately one I will avoid, even if I can see why many people find it compelling. One question: if the action cards are so important, is there at least an 'advanced variant' where each player is dealt 9 action cards and chooses which 6 to keep? That would mitigate some of the bad luck.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Sadly no variants at all - and as much as that's a solid idea, there isn't enough cards to draw. Once you deal out all cards to 3 players, there's only 2 left. In 4 players there is only 4 left. You wouldn't get enough spare cards. Someone here had the idea of drafting cards - if you could shave off a chapter in game length I think drafting would be perfect.

[@raedien]

He really failed to mention how important Prelude actions are.

[@DonBuonasera]

Thanks for a honest review!

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Any time!

[@Skipdoo]

I was hoping you would review this. Couldn't you give it a 3 or an 8 to make up my mind for me?! Agree with you on SUSD. After Paul left they seem to be more like board game activists highlighting and praising designers/publishers who share there ideals with an I'm right you're wrong attitude.....

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

Ha ha, 3 would be "bad" - it certainly isn't that, I got some enjoyment out of it. But i could never give it an endorsement personally. Certainly if Cole games are for you, you're going to love it, but you do need to note what I said and ask yourself "is that the kind of game I'd play"? SUSD were always about entertainment > reviewing. Nowadays, yeah I'm hearing more about them being more politically minded and "my way or the highway" attitudes.

[@travisbicklejr]

Appreciate your honesty.

[@TheBrokenMeeple]

I appreciate that!