Transatlantic - Gaming Rules! Review

[@apostateant]

Love your reviews, Paul. Clear, concise, honest... really everything I want out of a review.

[@filiplazov5895]

Keep being as honest as you are Paul, we need people in the cummunity like you. I am a huge Gerdtz fan but i feel this game might have been rushed out for essen.

[@GamingRulesVideos]

I got that impression too. Especially with the rulebook.

[@Lexicondiablo]

Certainly there are rule book and continuity issues but this game was being talked about at Leiriacon in 2016 and I play tested in Feb 2017 (when there was a formal game board and different cards). This has been a slow train coming so shouldn't be considered rushed. As an aside, I enjoyed the game but agree that I prefer Concordia.

[@KissellMissile]

He's been working on the game for 3-4 years, so I wonder how much rushing there was, but I agree with the sentiment.

[@GamingRulesVideos]

Yeah, those are two different things. A designer can be working on a game forever, but then the other job all of all the work that goes into actually creating the game, with rulebook, artwork, production, etc. That's a different thing.

[@KissellMissile]

Yeah, I don't disagree. Maybe what I should have said is that after so long (I first saw this on Essen lists in 2013 I believe), it boggles me a bit how it still could have been rushed. Was it really rushed, or were their standards just too low? Either way, it is unexcusable anymore.

[@Saint_Cuthbert]

Happy and thankful we have people like you in the industry Paul! Appreciate the honest review.

[@JefferyHunt]

I prefer it to Concordia. The rule book is a chore though.

[@chewiewins]

Critical reviews always welcomed. Fair views.

[@NellaArabrab]

Absolutely love your honesty! Another great review. Thank you.

[@tsimpkins43228]

I think I'm in total agreement. This publisher just made a lot of execution errors. Some blind playtesting where the group had to read the rules and play might have helped. However, after I got past these unforced errors, I actually don't think it is a bad game. I don't think it is a great game either, but I think I will play it a few more times before it leaves my collection. Thanks for reviewing!

[@grehtaeh]

Thanks for the detailed information about the rule book and cards.

[@Tabletop_Turtles]

Another example of a good reviewer being honest AND more importantly going on to say why they felt that way

[@GamingRulesVideos]

Thanks for watching :)

[@bimuhu]

being honest yes - but review?

[@frabac72]

Well done Paul, informative and enjoyable. Just a question: once you go past the rule book and the cards, how does the actual game play? I think I missed it among the rest

[@cchantal5435]

frabac72 that's because it isn't there. I watched the whole video and apart from "it has cards from Concordia, but not much in common with Concordia beyond that", I still have no idea what this game is, what it does, which mechanisms it uses, what's the aim, end game conditions. I watched this video and now have to try and find another video to get basic info about the gameplay. I didn't even get to see the board and components !?!

[@GamingRulesVideos]

Yeah, the only bit I said about the gameplay really was "did I really enjoy it?" and after 3 games I don't think I really did. It is hard to get past all the issues when they are impacting on the overall game experience, but even putting them aside, the game was just a bit meh and boring to me. As I mentioned in the video, the theme did not come across at all. And sure, Concordia is a very abstract game with no theme, so I don't mind that, but this one was just things moving around places, do stuff here to get points if I play this card because I have 3 ships here, etc. Put coal on them so that I can later get money from them, I just wasn't feeling it at all.

[@F.S.P.73]

Hello Paul! I just don't know where was the right place to ask you. Have you tried the new version "Crossing Oceans" or helped with that rulebook? Any thoughts or impressions? Thank you very much!

[@GamingRulesVideos]

I haven't had chance to try it.

[@lastburning]

Red & green is the natural choice for those numbers. Red indicates a negative thing (you lose money) and green indicates a positive thing (you gain money). There's a limited number or primary colors you can choose from. It's not possible to please everyone. And anyhow, you can always identify the number by its position on the card. The color coding is just a bonus. I agree with your other complaints.

[@keithhammons2605]

Aw man I was really looking forward to this. I'll wait for the route book update.

[@BenSaidScott]

Hmm. It’s difficult to disagree with any of your points in particular here. I’ve found, in general Mac Gerdts’ rule books tend to be unnecessarily confusing, and the same is definitely true here. I also agree with the colour choices, there are more than four colours, so use them! Again it just makes it feel a bit cheap, and is probably a balance between keeping costs down, and this game is reasonably cheap for a big euro. But, having said all that, I really like this game. I love the choice of when to retire ships, and when to keep them to make money. When to spend that little bit extra to get that fast ship, so you can get a blue riband. That makes the game have a really nice flow to it in my opinion.

[@GamingRulesVideos]

His rulebooks tend to be very minimalistic. However, Concordia rulebook is very clear. I have Navegador too which is really clear. This one is a mess.

[@BenSaidScott]

Gaming Rules! See, I actually found this just as unclear as the Navegador rulebook, though we did play the first edition of that.

[@GamingRulesVideos]

Right. I only got Navegador last year, the latest printing and the rulebook was good in that one.

[@Dell999950]

Paul -Do you have a link to your amended rule book please? I now know what you meant @ Bristol City of Games!!

[@GamingRulesVideos]

send me an email and I'll see what I can sort out if you really want to try the game :)

[@Lordmordisquitox]

I subscribe to your comments, played a solo game to learn the game and I will play Concordia many times over this one.

[@LelandSteel]

Completely agree on the horrid rulebook. The game took my three plays to get all of the rules correct, which makes an already complex game even harder to teach and to piece together strategies using the actions. It always seems like players fumble through the first half of the game before a competitive gameplay avenue becomes apparent to them. All that being said I still really enjoy this game. It seems to have charmed me and my play group. I've never played Concordia so not being able to make that comparison could be a factor in my opinion. Great vid as always!

[@chewiewins]

Great review. Fair review, stating reasons well. Never be afraid to have to be critical

[@npbggroup8052]

Nice review Paul...I already have a number of games on the shelf that don’t get played because its a chore and the rules are unclear. I’m a massive fan of Concordia...won’t be adding Transatlantic to my collection. Thank you for the honesty...I really don’t need to know any more. By the way...its Tuesday! 😊

[@GamingRulesVideos]

Tuesday you say? Time for me to prefer playing Concordia over Transatlantic then :)

[@bimuhu]

You are missing out on a very good game based on a unusually shallow review. I love his reviews but this time he just seemed to be frustrated and did not even review the game :) No hard feelings :)

[@npbggroup8052]

I looked at other reviews and BGG..It is definitely not for me but of course...no hard feelings.

[@fasolia]

So.. is there any revised rulebook??? Will you do a "How to play"? Please ???

[@GamingRulesVideos]

There is indeed a revised rulebook. I saw Rio Grande copies of the game at Origins, and it had the new rulebook in there. The fact that neither publisher has put the new rulebook online is disappointing to say the least.

[@bimuhu]

The game is actually very enjoyable and deeply strategic. It has several routes to score Victory Points that differ from Concordia. The mechanic that you add playable cards to your deck throughout the game is amazing. I agree with the bad rulebook and the investment card misprint (the only really annoying mistake I think). You seemed to be frustrated about those things, which made you forget to actually review more deeply the game play. And that's where the strengths of this game lie. Maybe you should give it another try one day. Otherwise I love your reviews! Cheers

[@patrickolmstead1557]

I played it shortly after Essen. Enjoyed the game, but thought it had some design flaws, including the rule book (we had to have several discussions about how to interpret the rules). There was a lot of down time. So I read through the rules, starting about round 2. I liked the ships, and thought the theme came through OK for me. My wife, who LOVES Concordia, but did not read the rules during the game, did not enjoy it. So we ended up not buying it. I would play it again.

[@sincitysir1]

Where can i find this rulebook?

[@GamingRulesVideos]

They didn’t do anything with it, which was sad.

[@sincitysir1]

@GamingRulesVideos that is indeed sad. I had to put the game back in the box after attempting to play it with friends.

[@GamingRulesVideos]

@@sincitysir1 Crossing Oceans is a better version of the game, but I played that once and then gave it away - it still had the same issues with game length and just rinse and repeat, but at least they fixed the rulebook and other issues.

[@danielnewman5773]

even tuesdays?

[@GamingRulesVideos]

especially tuesdays!

[@WhiteOpsDude]

wow.... an honest review.... I will sub right now to your channel.

[@GamingRulesVideos]

all my reviews are completely honest and full of my own opinions :)

[@TheJorgen99]

I agree that the rulebook isn't very good. When learning the game I had to google and search BGG:s rules section for Transatlantic to find the answers of lots of unclear things.

[@GamingRulesVideos]

indeed. which is not how a rulebook should be.

[@lindawhite8071]

CAN WE GET THE RULES YOU WROTE?

[@GamingRulesVideos]

I wish you could. They took me quite some time and were passed onto Rio Grande (or so I got told), but something got lost along the way, and I don't really know what happened.

[@rafffalsky]

totally agree, this is the worst rule book in the history of board games. Finding anything in it is a huge challenge, it's also unclear and confusing to the point I had to put some custom stickers inside, with my own take on the rules (especially scoring and game setup!), because even thought I played it numerous times, I still make fundamental and game breaking mistakes.

[@GamingRulesVideos]

I've read worse rulebooks. This one was pretty shocking though.

[@thatPUNKdude]

Oof. That execution looks quite bad. I'll stick to Concordia. Too bad PD/Rio Grande didn't take the time to create a clean game for customers

[@natedorward2256]

Yeah.... this game was a major disappointment. Aside from the rulebook problem and the poor visual design, there's the clunky scoring system--trying to explain how the final scoring works to players is a chore, and the three types of markers on the right (luggage, knots, tonnage) annoyingly have nothing to do with the ships' specs (passengers, speed, tonnage).

[@greginfla_1]

great game, slamming them on theme...... what true euro has a good theme?

[@keysersoze9469]

The game is way better than Concordia.

[@InVinceIble009]

This is probably one of the worst reviews I've watched in a while. You are barely talking about the game itself, and mostly talk about your grudge against it. You mention the rulebook is hard to read, whereas I never had any issue figuring out how to play after reading it. You mention misprints as if this were a deadly sin, when it actually doesn't impact the gameplay. The market card doesn't have the third option because it derives from the first action, not because it is absent. I watched for 9 minutes someone who was angry and grudging against the fact that the rulebook you put together wasn't on BGG yet. But what about the game? It's ok to dislike a game, if you can clearly explain why or you can put your thoughts on a certain perspective. But to be honest, at this point, your attitude completely discredits the little you said about the game... I'm very disappointed. I usually tend to watch your videos because I like the explanations. But clearly this one video was not made with the same labor of love you put in the other ones you do. I seem very harsh and virulent, but I think it was important to mention it. I hope you'll see this as constructive criticism.

[@toon8657]

I couldn't agree more, it's sad to watch... so much salt and gruge in this video, not really professional in my opinion for a channel as big as yours. And sadly, I hardly think they will release your improved rulebook now... Sure, the game has some minor graphic design flaws but it's still an awesome game in my opinion. It takes concordia and streamlines it in a great way! Removing the map and introducing an element of quickness to the gameplay. Everything needs to be done as fast as you can because every ships are moving/selling/transporting so fast! It creates a tension and brings hard choices that I really enjoyed... Just felt that I needed to bring my two cents after watching this really harsh video.

[@GamingRulesVideos]

Fair comments. I wear my heart on my sleeve and say what I think. Thanks for taking the time to comment, and I agree, I definitely allowed my personal feelings about the bad production and lack of care to impact on my comments about the game itself.

[@InVinceIble009]

@@GamingRulesVideos thanks for replying and for being humble about it. Like I mention, I tend to enjoy your perspective and your gaming videos. I'm really glad to see that you can take my comment as a constructive one. Thanks again and I wish you the best. I hope to have the chance to shake hands with you one day ^^

[@kipsyoutube]

Vincent Beaulac Would completely agree. Far too many chips on shoulders and banging on and on about the rule book which is not the game.