18 Replies to “City of Iron Final Thoughts Part II

  1. Yep, I think after watching both this Final Thoughts video and the previous one (along with the gameplay video), I do not think this game is for my daughter and me. Thanks, Richard!

  2. That doesn't make a lot of sense for me. It sounds like you have to play a counter tactic since your first action, That could work against an allways military foe, but the fact is that in a normal play you donΒ΄t know what strategy your oponent is going to use, so you usually they will get some leads the first rounds.
    And even working it seems not much fun to spend an entire play just trying to counter anotherone's strategy.

  3. I'm glad the designer responded, but this does still seem like lazy design. I hate games that make you feel like you should play a certain way or else the game suffers tremendously. I hated 1960 at first, because I felt like the Western United States is totally left out in the cold compared to the rest of the country, especially the East. But thematically speaking, it makes sense, and I was able to forgive that game. I think this is one of the major reasons I couldn't get into Runebound as well.

  4. Also Rahdo, are you planning on doing a runthrough of Eclipse sometime in the future? I keep hearing arguments about how some people love it and how some people hate it, and it would be cool to see someone do a decent playthrough of it.

  5. I like that the designer watched your video and tried to come up with a reasonable defense of his game for 2p, but the basic summation of what he's saying is you have to take 5 turns every round when you can only take 3. Yes, the bonus action cards you have to buy will give you those, but it will take a couple of rounds to get that money. Just looks like a 3-4 player game to me.

  6. Richard – do you think that this issue would kind of be muted if you play regularly with the same opponent, in the sense that if they learned that they couldn't succeed at a pure military strategy, regular play might trend toward balanced strategies? As in Dominion, a money player will eventually get beat most of the time once his opponent gains enough experience. that makes play trend towards balance.

  7. From my plays I find it's typically pretty balanced as people look at the board and ask "what's the best thing I can do this turn." Perhaps because I play with people who don't think a long ways ahead :). Personally I love the game even two player, but you are correct there is more player conflict then a standard euro may have.

  8. good point. if they're the hog player, you could rightly guess that they'll head heavy into military, i suppose, but otherwise you'd be kind of shooting in the dark πŸ™‚

  9. currently not planning on doing eclipse, but i wouldn't be surprised if my voters ended up demanding it sometime in the future πŸ™‚

  10. We made an aggressive house rule that you could raze opponents towns if you beat the defense (not equal) instead of capturing in. It makes an all-military strategy extremely risky.

  11. I get the feeling that this new information did not change your opinion of the game? While I appreciate having to pay attention to what the other player is doing, it sounds like you would have to ignore your own engine to just counter them, which would loose you the game in the end. That's great that it's possible to win without the Academy doesn't mean it's probable. Lots of ifs and mays in that response.

    I will probably get the game, not for now but as a goal game for when my kids are older.

  12. Damn i hate watching runtroughs off games πŸ˜‰ Now i like this game to I have still 2 games coming after new year. Two are under the x-mass tree. Just got Amerigo and expansion of Lords of waterdeep. And this game look really great in gameplay and the style is also great. My wife is going to kill me πŸ˜€

  13. Rahdo, I can understand the concerns that you have about the military aspect of the game and the needs of a non-military player in a 2p game. I have not played a 2p game but Ryan's comments make sense to me. The military player is playing a very lopsided game and therefore the response is an aggressive approach with everything else. I do admit that a player would need to notice the trend of the military player early in the game and the military decision are likely easier.Β 

  14. I'm glad you did this final thoughts part II. I was kind of regretting i bought the game after watching part I. But part II cleared it up and i'm looking more forward to playing it.
    Thanks for making this runthrough!

  15. This was very interesting, thanks for taking the time to do this. I think it would still be a tough go against military strategies, given how aggressive and multitasked you would have to be by necessity. Neat that the aggressive role is not always the military player. πŸ™‚

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *