the main / Entertain

Board game Terra Mystic PNP. TERRA MYSTICA desktop review. Why Terra Mystica Cool

Shovels.

Good day! I wanted to see the correctness of understanding the use of the shovel. If not difficult, tell me. Is it true that, with any action of terraforming (even if you get a shovel for magic) you can immediately build a dwelling, with the exception of the shovels of the coal obtained along the bonus (because the phase of action at the time of receipt of the bonus has already ended) ??? Thank you!

Explain to me, please, "high reeigulation" and "conflict and high interaction of players" in Terra mysticism.

1. Recharge. For me personally, Reeignness is when there are many ways to victory when you come to victory in different ways, in different parts you can use different combinations of tactics and strategies. In Terra, mysticism did not see this. It, of course, is, but in some minimum dose compared to most of the other games. I will explain: here for each fraction there is only one way to play as effectively to play, as quickly as possible to develop and score maximum points. Any other development variant worsens the development and set of points. Those. If you try to win, then playing the same race you will always do almost the same thing. Yes, it can be said that it is possible to drain the earth and to build in different places, but this is not enough, anyway 60-70% of the game in all parties for one race are the same. Yes, there are unique tasks for every move, but this is still not enough. In the same carcassone party go much more diverse. And in this cracked game - if I revealed a victorious strategy of one race, you will be in all parties playing this race to do almost the same thing. Diversity inside one race is extremely small. More precisely. All parties are 70% the same. In the same splender, you can use different tactics in different parties, and here is tied to the winning strategy of a particular race. It turns out the playability here depends only on the number of races.
So, the average playability of this game \u003d 14 times to multiply by the number of parties you need to identify a victorious strategy for each race.
It is extremely small for such a praised game. Perhaps I did not take something, I would like to know what. But today I played about 30 parties, won each armies. More than 100 parties played in the same kiklada and I still find new tactics that lead to victory.

2. Conflict and interaction. As for me, here it is even worse. There is almost no interaction. I heard the reviews that there are a lot of interactions in this game. Compared to what? With Carcassonne? There you can squeeze other people's cities, roads, fields. In Carcassonne, more interaction. In colonizers you can trade and change resources. In Serpe, which in my opinion is an improved Terra mysticism - they added military units there and you can fight. And here? Occasionally go to the land of the loser, which did not calculate it (and there are enough places on the map for everyone), sometimes give magic and say the first? This is less than 15% of the entire party. The only significant conflict in the game is a race in the temples. But even this does not reach the conflict of the same sickle.

The only plus for me in this game is a very thoughtful and cool resource management. He is here above all praise. Better than in Serpe, etc.
But this is a game with extremely low playability and about how everyone is digging in his tablet. These two minuses fully depreciate plus games. Probably, therefore the authors of the game rushed to make new games that will correct these shoals.

Explain to me, pliz that I missed and what I did not see. If here is a big interaction, then compared to what? From the fact that I played, almost any game surpasses Terra on interaction and jammed.

It's hard to say until you played 30 parties, it washes to be a little more than 10. But I, until, not all 100% clear even for one race, I am about the strategy as a winning as possible. True, I really fell in love with the game, I like everything !!
There are no interactions between players at all, zero. I do not know where such info comes from. Recharacterness - Supplement can strongly help in this matter.

I do not see the point of arguing, because someone comes, and someone does not. Personally, I immediately after buying the game during the week played all races, and I did not want to stop. It is possible that worldwide players can make tactics for each race so quickly, but it seems to me that it will be necessary at least three times to play for each of them. Total 42 batch, which is more than compensates for the cost of this box.
There is interaction between players, although it is not so active. First, as already mentioned above, it is a struggle for more favorable territories, that is, for those who will have to spend less resources for development. Secondly, he was already mentioned, this is the struggle for promotion in the temples. But you can also add, thirdly, this is the struggle for bonus scrolls before the new round. Often the whole strategy is tormented by the fact that another player earlier you manage to make the bonus so necessary now. Fourth, this is the use of force action that are located on the playing field. Since only one action effect can be used for the round, it often generates competition, and may also spoil the entire development strategy. Fifth, the struggle for cities. Immediately agree that this is not so obvious, but we have several times there have been such situations when several players have seen on the same city. Still, bonuses for building cities are very different, and sometimes it happens critical.
In general, what am I crucified here?! Personally, I like the game, it has already been played in it more than 42 parties, and so far she is not tired.

5 gaming aspects are well painted, for which the players compete with each other. Indeed, sometimes, by giving way in the struggle for a token of the city, taking into account the following moves, have to revise the nearest tactical solutions.

This is not already talking about the consequences of the lost competition for the construction site. An example from the fresh batch: I played the dwarves, located 2 starting buildings across the river, hoping to develop them up to 2 cities, then aim for the construction of the third. However, the rivals blocked the construction of the first city - it was necessary to connect 2 start points into a single city, then start the construction of the 2nd city, without thinking already about the 3rd. This is all in the conditions of rigid competition for the bonuses of rounds and on the tracks of cults.

Sorry, but I see "in this game there are good playability and conflict, because I like it." Is it possible without emotions and coldly harsh exactly about the mechanics of the game? Or here it is not welcome?

Ok, you gave the limit of this game in 42 batch, let it. This is definitely enough of the head to get a fan and compensate for the cost of the box. But! In chess, go, twilight of the empire playing years, discovering new and new strategies, more and more reveal these games. And here 42 parties. And that's it. I played 42 games and no longer development, the ceiling is achieved. Fan, of course you can get. But the fan and from plush toys can be obtained, and if we talk about a serious game with thoughtful mechanics, then 42 games are criminal. Moreover, the number of parties depends on the number of races And in chess, for a minute, 2 absolutely the same army. And the reegrity is such that humanity has not yet reached the ceiling in it. With all the components of the terra, its refeplening is only 42 batch. How can I call it a serious and deep strategy?
I myself like how it is done, fat cardboard, pleasant wooden houses. Just do not confuse emotions and mathematics of the game. These are different things. In Terre, mathematics is primitive and in deep games do not apply. What is written on the box is pure marketing that does not correspond to reality.
Someone needs 42 buses to play to understand the winning strategy in the game 5 in a row. This is also a low ceiling game.

By the way, in Serpe, the question with rejarcity was raised by the fact that the tablet saw into 2 parts and these parts can be mixed in different batches. Obviously, there the authors of the game thought about the question of playing, and there is no.

Conflict in the game. You repeated 5 aspects of the game that I have already written. I also wrote that this is not enough to call the game very conflict. The bottom line is that if you play effectively with your tablet, then all the first scroll will take it, etc. Little affected. If affects, then you are not effectively using your tablet. If you know how to work with the faction tablet effectively, you will leave and no scrolls will help you catch up with you. If you work with the faction tablet ineffective, then the same, no scrolls will help you win the game. Maximum conflict in Terre - in the race on the temples. But this is also not enough compared to the same sickle. Where there is a race for adventures, the struggle for the territory, a departure of resources, you can not give rivals to put stars and popularity, and there is also a war, which increases conflict at times.
20-30% - from conflict interactions. If the Terra seems to you conflict, then games where there is a war for you hyperconflial? Can you give examples of games where conflict is less than in Terre?

If you play Terra with experts, then they will need, then your development strategy will break out that no longer be in the leaders.
In contrast, for example, from wargimov, where it seems like a clear conflict, but the cubes are for the opponent, for you. (Not always with an explicit statistical advantage of battles pass, sometimes everything is kept in the balance).
Where is more conflicting when they just took and broke the whole game? And in this party, everyone arrived, you are a statist and out of prizes.

Not all games with war - in cubes. There is with controlled random or without random.

Honestly, I do not present myself as in Terre in the middle of the game can break the entire strategy that is tied to the Player's Tablet. Discard slightly back - yes, delay - yes, squeeze a couple of points - yes, but so to break and deprive the chances of winning - it is necessary to be very trying to give to rivals to turn this with you. If you can eat, throw a photo of this situation from the real party.

You can not only in the middle of the game, but even earlier, do not get the key area, the right action from the field, the desired token of blessings, city, etc. It slows up so much that you lose the opportunity to build a 3rd city, connect the territory, place in the temple, etc. It has such consequences that it is no longer so effective to do something in the next round. Something like a snowball. One, like a slightly unimproved action pulls a lot of scary with thedz. Result. Just not everyone can appreciate and understand these consequences.

In the game in the four-fold, without taking a toe + 2 per houses, you often played in a certain scenario. And it is in the first turns of 1 round.

Look at the bga experts. See a lot of examples.

For my 30+ parties I have not met the effect of a snowball. If you do not count situations where the players morally surrender in despite the fact that they have ways to play out, they simply do not see them because of emotions.
What are you talking about - in words sounds good. If this actually is in the game, what to do, we study the question and play yet.

There are chess players, a beginner (30 parties), a little better than the beginning (100 parties. And they decided to play with the international grandmaster in chess. It seemed to play a lot and everything in this simple game is understandable: the moves are familiar, the goal of the game and the strategy is visible to the naked eye .. .
It was not clear to the second only why from the first moves everything went somehow not so and he gave up without waiting for the middle of the party. Still, he planned to hold out a couple of moves longer.
But at first, at first everything was as necessary: \u200b\u200bthe strategy justified itself, but by the middle of the game, on the fourth go, the thunder suddenly hit the thunder among the clear sky and it became clear that this party would not be saved.
P. S. I do not always understand how experts in Terra are twisted from rampant situations, won by victory. But if you really want to comprehend the whole depth of the game, you can scrupulously, the layer behind the layer go deeper and deeper.
Register on BGA, play with high-tech players, share your impressions with us, whether you will have a game from another, previously an unknown side.

Looked up a lot of records of parties on BGA and YouTube. From a similar snowball, I saw only when players were clearly with a big zadro-level difference. Those. One is clearly stronger, the other is clearly weaker. As a result, a snowball. Neither in neither the snow chess as a rule does not occur when the masters of one level play. Snowball is a consequence of a different level of players. Where one simply does not see and does not understand what they can do with him and does not take anything. Player good level There will be such things to see and kill in advance. If the game has the effect of a snowball in good players of one level, then it is rather minus games, because The game is simply not flexible. In go, you can play the first full page, and then win. In chess too.
But the question about the balance of races remained. Here many people write that races are unbalanced. Then what game is praise, if this mathematics will break the game?
True, I myself did not notice any imbalance in races for my parties. Just each needed my unique approach, but it is in any game with asymitric parties. I won in the terra of any army, the breakdown has not yet seen. But what was embarrassed - so these are bonuses for the round - they can go to someone in the suit, there is no one.
Accidentally, not because of this, below wrote about the auction of races?

We talk about different snowballs, it seems. I'm talking about the fact that the missing resource, or the seizure of the territory on which there were views, or another event, due to some unexpected action of the opponent, can entail a snow com negative consequences.
For example, unexpectedly selected the territory near an almost completed city. You could not build a city in this round and get 2 workers from the city tokens, thanks to which they could not put 2 houses and get 8 by a blessing token and a round bonus. There were no income of 2 workers for the next round. 4 mana spent not 7 coins,
And on the shovel for another territory to complete the city (for example, not quite a potential city blocked). But by this time the tokens of the city ended. As a result, you were not allowed by, money, workers, in this round did not build 2 bargains (bonuses were on them), lost 6 more (or 12 with a blessing concern). In the next round, they did not receive money from them, did not build the temple, did not advance in the cult, did not receive Manu, blessing, the round of the round for a position on the track, etc.
As we can see, the development slowed down very significantly, not to mention the underwent software.
Approximately such a com (or rather the chain of events - consequences) can be formed only for a couple of rounds.
Someone spoke, there is no interaction and conflict in the game). If you evaluate similar things in the language of warheim, consider that with thedz. The result is practically drank your army from the game, leaving several helpless units.

Yes, it is cool to trim the opponent suddenly at the right moment so that his made efforts are in vain and he could not realize the conceived, break the bamboo to the end of Round, while others go to victory. It's straight to the buzz.
But this, as for me, is in any good and thoughtful strategy.

\u003e 70-80% of the success of the game in Terra depends on how efficiently you dig in your tablet.

No, not at all.

I don't really like the "Terra Mystic", there are obvious shoals: unbalanced races, demandingness to the number of players, dull megakoschel with glasses bonuses in each round.

But! At the same time, inside her classic abstraction on the topic of graphs and control of the territories. This is never a digging in the tablet and no sharing on soap. For this, the developers are bold plus, it is really a fresh jet.

I remember the game of the throne, where the control of the territories decides. Cyclades where territory control decides. Kemet, where territory control decides. You seriously want to say that in Terra controls the territories is also critical, as in Kemet?
If not, the terra is not about the control of the territories (although it is present slightly), but about something else.

Still as decide. Four - five experienced players can be so a party to play in Terra mysticism, precisely with an emphasis on control of the territories that Kemets with kikladami will nervously smoking on the sidelines. But for two three, Area control is certainly turns into water. That is why they always advise to play the maximum composition or at least four. In Terra mystics control of the territories a special highlight of the game. Special that the mechanism itself is beneficial from classic games To control the territories. In such games, the mechanism is simple: put the chip into the territory and it is yours. And in Terra mysticism, thanks to the "repainting" of foreign land in his own (the mechanism of which is directly taken from such an elegant section of mathematics as the theory of graphs), makes the game of the game very interesting and fascinating, and the main thing is gambling, dramatic and moderately conflict.

I apologize for my French, but a feeling of some other test is created on the theory of graphs. Probably because many times won the parties in Terre with different races, scoring the territories to control the territories and at the same time building in 3 cities. And despite the fact that I repainted land. Only I did not bother to win.
I admit that it is possible in rivals, although these same people played in other games more than worthy.

But, if you believe in your words, it is enough to do one tidy cutter to get rid of the opponent. And this, if, honestly, not in plus game, because For the correct accurate impact, it is necessary to carefully remember who as evolving, who wants to do, how are things on the tablets every player. Those. Not "correctly assess the situation", but simply "digest a lot of information." Not elegant for the "cool strategy" in our time when it is valid that the correct interpretation of the data is valued, and not to memorize a large number of information.

Plus a non-scale map on the number of players. How did they allow in such a "great" game? In general, something does not converge. If a brilliant game Alscal, then it is impossible to call it in the genius.

\u003e You seriously want to say that in Terra controls the territories is also critical, as in Kemet?

In Terre Mystika, he is much more critical than in Kemet. The "Terra Mystics" controls the territories of this is the essence of the point and the meaning of the game, and in the "Kemet" is simply an insignificant detail to the rest.

Looks like you confuse theme and gameplay again. Military Theme does not mean control of the territories, and the absence of a pisch-pisching guns in the game does not mean that it is about digging in the tablet. (Percent of 90 abstracts is about controlling territories in one form or another.)

\u003e The "Terry Myti" control the territories is also the essence of the game itself and the meaning of the game, and in the "Kemet" it is just an insignificant detail to the rest.

In Kemet, specific territories are the most important source of software. Indeed, an insignificant part)

Races in Terre can not be balanced. Their force depends, for example, from:
1. Other races in the game (how much the color of their home territories differ from yours)
2. Procedure of the move in 1m round (for example, if the witch 4e, and in the game prizes, say, 3 and 5 rounds on the houses, then they can greatly suit just because they are 4e and they do not have enough of these bilatling houses), including from the order of the initial arrangement
3. From round bonuses (see 2, for example), or in which rounds the fortress / sanctuary (someone in the suit of their early one, someone does not)), etc.
4. From the 2nd main bonus for 18/12/6 points (if you play with the addition)
As you can see, factors are quite a lot.

Those. The same race in one scenario may be significantly stronger than himself in another scenario.

Therefore, those who play in Terra are in serious, play strictly with the auction rule to choose from races and about the course of the complement (for this, the addition itself is not necessary to have to play with such rules).

By the way, the auction rule is equally important and in Clare Caledonia. Often the situation, when the 1st player gets so-like a clan, so, for example, when a threesome-four-way clans are useful to roll back, arranged auction.

Those. The balancing of the CAP occurs without proceeding from the editors of their unique features (although 2 races from Dopa and went out), and on the basis of the strength of their characteristics in relation to a specific layout.
Very competent and wise decision: first, not to whom, besides my beloved, you caught the guilt for the fact that I chose the wrong race or not enough to roll another. Secondly, the adjustable balance of races is also a very competent approach.
Minus one: In order to balancing the experience.

Everything is so, but I will probably never understand what the benefits of the initial auction aimed allegedly on the balance of the races of the race at a particular party. By itself, the auction can not give anything. It is all built exclusively on the human factor. Someone is bluffing, someone makes a bet of at random or generally inflicts the race on the fan of joke for, and someone is hard with a serious look attempts something there to squeeze the maximum. And most importantly, as in general, using the auction, you can determine and adjust the degree of balance between races? Who knows the optimal set of the starting points of chaos magicians in relation to for example to the mermaids? Who during auction can understand and understand how much starting points need to not "extended"? I may not be mistaken, but I sincerely do not understand the meaning of all these auctions.

well, if you "in the subject", played a lot of parties, then you can evaluate the usefulness of one or another race on the starting layout of bonuses and other dynamically changing pieces
it's a straight for all softening chips
sit for the auction with "rampnies" or fans of the fan so-so hope, yeah

personally, I am not in the subject) I do not like TM) I just know a pair of terra mystic fans, which, according to the initial layout, will explain to whom it is worth playing, but for whom there is no)
so I know perfectly for whom this rule, but it is clearly not for me)

Example 1. TM tournament with the author's participation from the "Star". It was carried out in the same slack, the races were determined by the draw. Starting from a certain stage, when high-level players remained, the outcomes of the parties were determined at the draw stage. If I remember correctly, the hobbits in that layout did everyone.

Example 2. Our tournament in Yekaterinburg, a final batch with auction. Called strong races. There was a stubborn wrestling, the first 3rd places finished with a difference in one point (the second from the first lag behind 1 point, the third one - also 1 point).

Attention, question. Which of the options is better: the first when you throw the lot on the race and you can disperse, without playing (as in chess, when players do not have a party, when and so everything is clear), or the second, with the "incomprehensible" auction?

The auction is needed by TM. But at the same time, the understanding of this fact scares me. I have played only two parties understood that between races of the abyss. If you apply the fact that there is one more abyss between races with a certain layout, then it is done quite sad. So you need to be straight deeply understand the game, and this is an amateur. It's like in the destruction seasons. Without a draft, unbalanced arcade, but with the draft attempt to combat predestinability.

Plus, as said the effect of a snowball. In the first round, did not take the desired piece of soil and the following five watched, as others played.

The game is good, but very demanding. Too demanding. Plus the player level should be equal. Those. You can get pleasure, but you need to prepare well

Any game with normal and above the level of difficulty, with decent playability is very demanding. To the one who is afraid of this, only one will remains: playing children's games.
Serious games require a deep understanding of it as the game itself, experience in concretely, and a common understanding that you can and what can not be done in games (understanding what kingmeking is, for example).
Not everyone needs serious games, someone in them is hard to play. And not interesting.
Not everyone needs family, Fillers. Someone is easy to play in them. And not interesting.
Pick up such as interesting to you, and your friends. After all, the most important thing is communication. And so that it is the most pleasant and long need to like everyone.
Thank God, the choice of games is a huge and every one can pick up a successful combination of complexity, mechanic, setting, etc.
And it's great.
P.S. The modern level of chess development is such that if playing at a high level, then you need to know and keep a huge whole debut in my head, their variations. Most simple mortals are not necessary, while no one says that chess - bad game. Just not everyone needs it at the deepest level. And in the stands. Games with high relaignation gradually opens the depth, which did not suspect. That is what for many and allows you to lay it again and again.
But, as in chess, players located at different levels of understanding, as a rule, is not interested in playing with each other. These are the opposites of such games. And this is normal. Wolves are afraid - not to walk into the forest. At the same time, it is not necessary to climb into the thicket. Someone and forest park is enough.

1. They are balanced. You can win anyone. It is necessary to repel from the layout.
It is necessary to play with the promotion of cities, bonuses of rounds ... and auction. With ice and volcanic races from Dopa, as a rule, more complicated. Therefore, more interesting.
2. There was no purpose to combine with extra 1. It will be TM 2.0, the rebirth of the game with new mechanics in the same setting after a while. Announced the properties of races (fortresses, for example) changed along the game. Announced exit this year. We are waiting, I hope for Essen will have time.
3. In Guy with races, exactly the same situation with the choice of races: in some scenaries, one is stronger, in others - others. The most important thing is to choose the right race at the beginning of the game. For this you also need experience.

1. With what kind of scenario, say, Fakira can beat Darkling even with bonus fakir cities? If Darkengling drove the auction on -20 points? And if you were driving, then you can dry yourself?

2. Yeah, looked at how wonderful old races are joined with "ice and a flame" and decided that it was better to burn.

3. Let's just say, in the guy they are less imbalanced, there is no such that Ice virgins row two bolds bolds, and engineers simply build bridges.

1. With this, what I won them in the final at the tournament in Yekaterinburg.
2. know comments
3. When you type 200+ points in Guya, thoughts about the imbalance of races can even more. Maybe it's still not only in the imbalance, but also something else?

https://terra.snellman.net/game/fourteenfactionsseries01game01.

The superiority of Fakirov over Darklings is a fully executed event.

In Terre, you just need to know the game very well, and for this you need to operate with too large the number of input data.

But judging by your tone, and on the Tone MAE is all empty words.
It is impossible to bring facts, a person is not ready to take them.

\u003e 70-80% of the success of the game in Terra depends on how efficiently you dig in your tablet.

Today I thought that I basically "sink" in the tablets of rivals on the party to assess their possible priorities and moves in the current round to evaluate the danger emanating from them in the struggle for the bonuses they need, the actions of the force, move along tracks. For example, will this player have workers and money to build a fortress / sanctuary and pick up a round bonus "4 for CR / SV"? Will that rival of the priest spend on a track or to improve navigation and capture the plot of interest to me? Etc. And in my tablet, I do not need to watch - I don't know about the income, the abilities of the race also learned.

Not really. More precisely, not at all. In this game, it's not in rubies and emeralds. And tactics in it are:
- You can buy cards, focusing on the required venue sets to take 4 + 3 points in the last move.
- You can play at all scoring on my nobles.
- You can buy the cheapest cards to pick up the dear at all without spending stones on them.
- You can buy for the party exactly 3 cards of 5 points, this is the fastest tactic if the layout allows.
- You can only take cards that give maximum points in our row (1 point in 1-m, 3 points in the 2nd and 5 in 3rd), it is optimal in speed, but cut it easily.
- You can take the cards to which the minimum of stones are required (let's say there are two points for 3 points, the cost of one 6 stones, another 8), this method allows you to quickly buy cards.
- You can keep stones that need other players to buy their cards.
- You can take the stones that are left less than everyone, because They are most needed to rivals.

If you combine these tactics and mix, then the interaction and refestability goes much more than in Terre. Normally for a primitive phillerca?

This is a bust, there is no such a variety. As a rule, everyone estimates the initial layout and plan one version of the game and if something goes wrong, then use the spare. Moreover, someone also wants to use your tactics, it will be trimmed and so on. I played a lot of parties, if the tactric listed above is, is usually one (two), which quickly bore.

Maybe not with those played?) Do not forget that, as a rule, not only 2 tactics "to win" are combined, but also used at least one to "push the opponent." In the process of one batch of 1-2 tactics, a maximum of 3-4 may be no more, it is so. But the batch is fast. For this time, the batch is the norm. In another party - other tactics. For Filler, it is.

This meant meant that no matter how much movement options for the victory in the splendors - everything comes down to the search for just one. This is bored. I'm not so important I went to my nobles or save on dear maps - This is a forced measure due to the influence of rivals and scenario on the table. If the cards came out in the 3rd row on blue and red stones, and in front of my nose, all the cards with these stones are taken - it is a purchase tactic 3 cards for 5 will not be relevant, no matter how I wanted to go to her.
Kohl compare the number of tactics, then you should not write about the filler. A lot of nuances are not taken with this comparison. Yes, the result to which goes to TM is also one, but the question in the ways to achieve it and there are more.

\u003e This is a forced measure because of the influence of rivals

Wort! Finally! And I'm talking about it. In this filler of conflict and interaction at times more than in the Volume Strategy of Terra Mystic. All you do in a splender is directly tentatively with each opponent's move. In Terre, despite the abundance of opportunities, everything is tied on the player itself first. The interactions between the players in it is much less.

It often happens that in euro games interaction less than in the filler. Only this is due to the fact that in the filler there are much less actions that you can make less variations and subsequent decisions. Then the question is not to TM, but the category of games to which it treats. If you like the Fillers with good interaction - one, the euro-strategy to think about something else.

I like Brasss Lancashire. Euro. To think. With much higher interaction between players than in Terre.
Sickle. Map, Tablet, Improvement, Buildings, Resources, Coins. Strategy to think. The interactions are many times more than in Terre.
Santiago de Cuba. The interaction is greater than in Terre.
Zolkin. The interaction is greater than in Terre.
In every these games, every move of any player can hardly affect others. And you have to adapt to every move. In Terre, you can make moves that do not affect others. Or affect, but not as much as in the above.

Surpe has battles and direct interaction. There, the mechanics cannot be less interaction. Terra can not oppose direct attacks that are pure interaction and conflict.

And about Brass. Well, let's see. In both games there is money, and the one who scored more than other software wins. There is a field where players exhibit buildings from their personal tablets. Houses are built for resources and money. And with constructed houses receive profit. While the difference is not observed. Do not get on the wrap, these are the games of the same type.

In Terre, the same interaction, if not more, how much and in other games of the genre - Lorenzo, Marco Polo, Austria Hotel, Rosenberg, Imp. The theer among others allocates chessiness and complete absence of random - there is no hidden information, no cubes, respectively - who will better calculate all the options - he won. It strongly strains the brain, given the number of possible options. Digging in your tablet - yes, he can learn for three parties for each fraction. But all raisins and interaction in actions available to everyone. Playing in Terra, I think about the tablet 20% - no one will hurt me there. But on the field, actions for strength, the priority of the course, bonus tokens and blessings, cults and cities are fighting. What to take yourself and what to allow to take the opponent? You correctly said that 70% of the game is a tablet - or rather - 70% of your victorious points are a tablet, and 30% of the remaining points you will divide on everyone - and who plays out the tablet correctly - a larger piece.

And, since the terra is the game of the old quenching - it does not forgive mistakes - any loss of the pace (not usually connected with the tablet) entails the loss of victory points at the end, the more, the more rounds to the end. This is because it has no bypass paths, if someone takes something, then it is forever or until the end of the round, if you have naked - will not turn out. And on the tablet of almost every fraction, two ways are usually playing - right into bolds of blessings or up to the faction property. This often changes the entire strategy and adds variability → Recharacterness.

Thank you for the answer. In fact, only you and Cyril2012 answered my question in the case.

In the other answers I saw "I think so, because I think so", "this game is cool, because I like" and "this game is a masterpiece, I don't want to know anything else." Especially chased when they said that in Terra Area-control decides more than in the PI. In the IP control of the territory gives 100% victory immediately, in Terre gives or deprives N glasses, which may affect victory. Influence, and not give 100% victory. Terra Mechanics in principle can not give such a critical-dependent area-dock, like an IP. It's just Faispalm.

I have already been a similar case when one guy with foam at the mouth argued that the hive is the same deep game, like chess and did not want to hear anything else. I told that this is a low ceiling game, i.e. Reeign, she has only 2 winning strategies (it was before the release of the latest Outside Dopa, which changed the situation). And then this guy lost 10 parties in a row. What says that I am a game and the situation with her understood better than him.

I would definitely compare the game with chessat, because The goal in chess is concrete - kill the king. Games with a specific purpose are still played differently. It is not even strategy, but tactics. Rather, terra can be compared - a game with open information and a set of glasses. For victory, it is enough to get at least 1 point more.

Why began a survey - this is a question of playability and interaction. After studying all comments, Fidbeck and your experience come to the following conclusion:
the victory first of all depends on how well you speak your tablet. If bad, then everything else does not matter, you are in the span. If all the players are equally well dominated by their tablets, then then those 30% of the interaction in the game decide. And for a good game spins around these 30%. I believed that this was not enough. But! Considering that this is a game with fully open information and a taking point can be calculated from the very beginning of the party, this is a clear plus game. I would say the raisin. On the other hand, there is similar to one degree or another in any good game. But in many others modern games Any cards are added, and this is + matching and probability theory.
Reararabiability depends on these 30% of interaction + additional.
In general, it is good game on miscalculation. And let everyone decide for himself enough to play him or not.

I rethought those parties in Terra, which I had. There was an obvious advantage of those who know their tablet well and plays at the level and those who see the tablet in the first and did not reveal their pros and cons. Those. Parties were finished, one can say, even at the start. Therefore, things before these 30% simply did not reach. It makes sense for me to pump several players in Terra and, when everyone is ideally to use his tablet, arrange a real battle.

I tried it to objectively evaluate the mechanics. Now my personal subjective.
For a long time, before the exit terra, I decided for myself that I sit in board games to interact with other alive people as much as possible. I saw someone playing a solo to the table foul, but for this I have a computers poul. And in board games, in order to interact with other players as much as possible. At the same time I understand that many (and me too) sometimes play and solo, but this in order to study mechanics, gain experience / understanding and in the next party to take revenge from the opponent. It's how to go to the gym before the fight in the ring.
For this reason, Terra is simply not my game. Play occasionally and get a fan from the process, but this is not what I will play regularly. I prefer the game where there is no lower depth of the miscalculation, the work of the brain, but at the same time more interaction. In the same chess, the rising sun rigid conflict comes from the very first move, from the first moves you can deprive the opponent that he already has. In the forbidden stars, indirect interaction begins during the arrangement of the game. Yes, in Terre, too, from the very beginning there is an indirect interaction. Direct is when the player is deprived of what he already has, indirect - when you deprive him that he can get. Terra is a game of indirect interaction. Yes, it can cause driving emotions, be decisive in the party. But personally, I like games with direct interaction or threat of direct interaction.

Thank you all who participated in Holiv .. conversation.

1. Play inxtrum - there will be conflict. Strategy will break. When playing the big composition you have to move away from them, at the right moment being distracted by the situation for your party. There is also conflict that the players will more often take the steps you need, at a minimum, and completely block you, if you will blindly play the strategy of your race, as a maximum. There were also such parties. Art is to break the strategy to the opponent, seeing his bottleneck, without breaking his. On the other hand, on the contrary, it is not to give one's own, so that the aggressor spends on a lot of resources, without achieving success and turning off itself from the struggle.
2. Play parties 100, playing various races, incl. From the supplement.
3. Play with auction according to the rules for choosing a race from the supplement, in 3 different fields. Knowing exemplary strategies of all races, which of the Roundov bonuses falling out in this party and the 2th main bonus favor in this particular layout. You will know how much (up to 40 ° C) what races should be omitted at the start relatively weaker.
4. Somehow my language does not turn to compare Terra with Carcassonon. Still, they are completely in different weight categories. It's like to put in the ring of the boxer "Mohacha" and, even if you do not sufficiently, but heavyweight.

I compare not mechanics of games, but recharged and conflict, which these most mechanics give. It can be done. How to compare the power of the blower and heavyweight blow.

With extra did not play. In the database, the maximum composition was playing.

And where did you get that someone should tell you and present something that you have not seen?
This is stupid. The game obviously did not like.

The same stupidity, as being the owner of some expensive German to come to the Korean car lovers club and ask you to have been proven that they go on something worthwhile.

It's just useless, you still won't play it, no matter who and how much and what will you answer.

You just gave rise to Mount Flud.

And probably\u003e

The meaning of your "Show me", if you are already all the nuances and impressions have already painted and decided?

It seems that you just came to see the words that the game is sucks. Erongs are engaged in general.

Absolutely empty, strain and useless conversation in this case.

No one owes nothing to nobody. I asked who would want - will answer. And the usefulness of your comment is in question.

And you made a mistake. My game fully comes, just causes some questions.

I had an initial question, by discussion I received an answer to him. For this, discussions are needed. For me, this discussion is useful. Maybe even for those who are interested in such questions.

\u003e And probably\u003e 30000 people around the world (this is only one of those who marked on table sites) just fools and blinders.

Clarified. Yes, as I understand it, everything is like this: you can add to navigation and yes - for construction, incl. cities. The river cell is not considered, only buildings are always considered. After all, in fact, it is similar to the presence of a bridge. Consider that the mermaids always have a bridge.

Ability:
You may Skip One River Space When Founding A Town. (You.
decide IF and When You Want To Use This ability. WHEN FOUNDING A TOWN IN
this Fashion, Put The Town Tile On The Skipped River Space. Of Course, You
may Build Bridges AS Usual.)

Under the impression of the "resourceman" on the tablets of the project Gaya, "Toporno collected something like that for TM. JPG File threw in "Files and Links", a photo of the finished "crafts" can be seen in "Photo and Video". In principle, this "resourceman" can be used in any game where resources are constantly rotating, the need for obtaining / delivery "Mountain disappears "little things)

As part of the New Year's review competition Konstantin Manzyuk sent material about the game Terra mystic. It is rather not just a review, but a story about the impressions of the game with the allocation of its advantages and minuses. If briefly is a very good euro with the rules that are not easy to explain.

I have long wanted to write a review on the wonderful game Terra Mystica, but all the hands did not reach.

And then how happiness saw a review competition to the site. I apologize in advance to all readers for possible flashers, the first experience of writing reviews

ATTENTION: it is rather not a review of the game, but Salonka impressions from the process of acquaintance with her.

Well, let's proceed.

Introduction

I live in Barnaul, this is a kind of depth. You can get the games only by ordering from online stores, about collective orders from Kulstaf, of course and speech can not be. The local store trades a small selection of HobByworld publishing games. Therefore, the terra mystica hit me just because I reached it. The more nicer was the surprise from the familiarity with the game.

The cherished box arrived ...

When they brought a box with a game, I was shocked by the abundance of a tree and cardboard in it. It really impresses. Stuffing is no worse than in Eclipse. You just think about - inside the box only cardboard and wood. From paper components only rules.

After the sacred ritual of squeezing tokens, partitioning them into groups and packaging on ziplocks (which, by the way, put with a large margin) I began to study the rules.

On the rules

The game is quite simple and logical, but to tell the rules is difficult. Such a paradox is associated with the fact that each aspect of the game is very organically intertwined with the rest. It turns out a whole world that lives according to its rules. And from which side, do not go to the rules, you will buy a situation that the player must already know some of these rules.

The Book of Rules itself is written perfectly, inserts are especially pleasant to the artistic description of races encountered in the game. If you read them, the game begins to look very atmospheric.

Rules themselves

Now I will try to completely summarize these rules to understand what readers understand what is happening in this game. Nuances I will omit, because the goal is to create a general idea of \u200b\u200bthe game.

In Terra mystics, we take on the role of one of the 14 races that inhabit little world. In the course of the game, we will more and more locate and develop our civilization. But each race can live only on one of the 7 types of terrain (forests, mountains, deserts, empty, lakes, fop, fields). If you want to populate the region, then it is necessary to terrarify it, that is, to convert to the region with its type of terrain.

Also in order to develop, we can not set up new regions, but to improve the old buildings. All buildings bring us resources at the beginning of the next turn.

Another way of development is the ministry to the elements, which brings precious power there (analog of mana, which is spent on additional resources and opportunities). In addition, the high level of ministry of the elements gives various bonuses from the corresponding gods at the end of the course (mostly resources are also).

And all these paths, one way or another, bring us precious software.

The game consists of 6 rounds that pass in 3 phases.

1) The phase of obtaining resources - we just get those resources that bring us the buildings. The system is very simple and transparent - when we exhibit the building with a personal tablet on the field, then the tablet opens the resources that we get (the system is similar to Eclipse)

2) The phase of action - starting from the first player, each player makes one go, until all players are saved. Each player is free to perform any of the possible actions if it has enough resources (and hello eclipse again). It is in this phase that we are terraverting the territory, we build and improve the buildings, send the priests to serve cults and a number of possible actions.

3) the phase of receiving bonuses for serving the elements. In this phase, we get the resources that one or another cult is given to this move.

At the end we just consider anyone more by. We get them along the game for various actions (in our games it is about 50-60% of all software), as well as at the end of the game for the greatest territory and for a higher level of ministry to the elements (each element is considered separately).

Pros and cons of the game

Pros:

1) Game design. Personally, I like art in the game, its color gamut, pictogram style, wooden components.

2) "Thoughtful" game. This manifests itself in everything. Player tablets - they have all the necessary information. The number of resources received, the prices of buildings, the properties of fractions, the power of buildings, the complexity of the territory of the territory, the power conversion table to the resources - all this is on the tablet and so well and understandably decomposed that it is difficult to get confused. And I have not yet called everything. I just realized how much information in the case gives a tablet.

Separately, pay attention to excellent pictograms. They were even clearer than in the game of 7 wonders, although the Bowza showed the standard of work with pictograms.

Another elegant moment is tokens of bonuses for each round. They are laid out 6 on the field. These tokens describe additional conditions for receiving software in this round. When the round ends, we simply close the next tokens. Thus, never forgetting what a round goes now (for our company it was a big problem in Eclipse).

3) Excellent scalability of the game. Terra mysticism is perfectly played in the range of 3-5 people, despite the one for all the field. This is due to the interesting mechanics of obtaining strength in the game (the player gets strength if the opponent builds or improves the territory with him or improves the building), as well as with the fact that some buildings are cheaper, if there is a rival in the neighboring territory. This sets the choice of players - to build next to the opponent, but risk that in the future it will be difficult to take a new territory or develop aside from the rest, but slower due to the lack of strength and the big price for some buildings.

Of course, a game of 3 and 5 people differs in style quite strongly. But it is equally interesting to play any form (the game for two did not happen to try).

This property is especially valuable after the purchase of Chaos In Games the Old. WORLD (strictly 4 people) and throne games (strictly 6 people or not the impressions of the game).

4) Choice. The game always gives the choice to how to develop. And all the ways of development are somehow related to each other. Each move player decides - whether to get some software now, whether to increase the chance to receive at the end of the game, to develop their race to the end, so that in the future it was easier with resources or to save in the next round to go first and collect all the cream in the next round. And this is only the top of the iceberg.

5) the absence of random generators. There are no cards or cubes in this game. It is random only at the stage of forming the starting conditions of the game, but it rather increases the uniqueness of each party. Everything in this game is controlled by players. And all the surprises, all the collars of great plans can only be caused by other players. And it gives a kind of excitement when you are waiting for your turn and hope that the opponent will not take the territory or ability. Feelings are like the game in the Ticket to Ride.

6) a variety of ways to win. There is a huge number of ways to obtain software that can be combined with each other in any proportions. And from this will be a victory. After the terra mysticism, some games begin to look one-sided. For example, in Eclipse, the whole game spins around the war, the rest is secondary. Moreover, without supplementing the scheme of development of its fraction, it is often approximately alone. In the game Chaos In The Old World, the developers themselves chose the paths that players go to victory. These games did not become less interesting, it's some of the most beloved games to me, but they clearly lose the Terra mysticism in this aspect (the fans please do not throw stones into me).

7) The atmospheric of the abilities of races. The most unsteady plus of this game. Many people will argue with me, but if you read artistic rings in the book of the rules, all the abilities fall into place and seem perfectly suitable and often very interesting.

In addition, it is often in the field that hafling attached with their huts everything you can, the cultists are more or more like many cults, mermaids have a bunch of settlements on the coast, the magicians hurried to build temples of the elements, the gnomes were exposed to tunnels all the territories, and so that one-piece city is completely There are no games.

8) the logical of the game. There is just nothing to add. Everything is simple, understandable and transparent.

9) The most important thing in serious games is a balance of the game. At least, until it was possible to find some special loopholes and broken moments in the game.

This time, we have mastered the small additional to the "revolver", beat in Terra mysticism and refreshed in the memory of Nuremberg.

So pleasantly passed that I did not have to ask anyone to settle for the continuation. The rules seemed difficult in the study do not cause any more questions and did not even have to contact them throughout the party - everything suddenly became intuitive.

Tablets were distributed randomly. I got the gnomes (photo below). Remembering the previous sad experience with a lack of workers paid particular attention to this issue and, as a result, there were no problems with white cubes. The construction of the tunnels turned out to be a profitable, but more than 2 pieces for the round did not work out, and yet it is 8 by. Dwarves roll!

Yule got witch (in the photo below). Especially unremarkable witches the whole game was inferior to the gnomes, but at the end - thanks to the developed navigation, they were very successful to merge their lands and break out the final count. The move was unexpected, as navigation before that none of us pumped out, obviously underestimating its advantages.

Witches

Ira got Magi Chaos (downstairs). A very strong nation that gets for the construction of a sanctuary or a church of 2 blessings (!). But they have a significant disadvantage: 1 house at the beginning and sharp lack of workers. As result, Ira had to develop for a very long time to put the first sanctuary.

Magi Chaos

Favorite from duel games. For a long time, although already purchasing 5 extra and "revolver 2", but somehow everyone was not solved. Now the hour has come - got the first extra.

Revolver: Ambush on Gunshot Trail (1.1)

Consists of two modules. The first module seemed more interesting - two new participants join the gang (that is, the participant 4, but the card is only 2), the sheriff has the opportunity to arrange ambushes in each location. Mackage independently chooses which ambush to arrange and where, placing a map of shirt up. When the chip goes to new locationMap is revealed before the sheriff. The ambushes can be three species - either it's someone from the assistants to Malways, or this is some kind of action, or nothing happens.

Is there a similarity with extra to the "revolver" and Boyarsky?
Frame from the movie "Man With Capuchin Boulevard"

The second module contains a couple of dozen new cards that can be replaced by cards from the base deck: a character for a character, action on action, weapon on weapons. In this case, the number of cards in the deck should be 62 (as in base version games) no more card.

Revolver (Revolver) + Revolver: Ambush on Gunshot Trail (1.1)

Naturally, both supplement modules are compatible, that is, you can also arrange an ambush, and take new members in the gang, and collect your own deck using new maps from the addition.

Revolver (Revolver) + Revolver: Ambush on Gunshot Trail (1.1)

Unfortunately, the addition did not inspire, but, and, to joy, did not hurt. The game is played as before, new members of the gang and ambushes in locations did not change anything radically, as well as the ability to collect their deck. In the latter case, you can rather find your minuses, as the preparation for the game has become longer.

For the first time they played 1.5 years ago. Then the game seemed interesting, but complicated. I decided to leave it for the future, which came after wonderful we had "Terra Mystic".

There was not much time to repeat the rules - after 1.5 years, everything was surprisingly remembered. Probably, partly due to the fact that the game was noted and left behind something in memory.

The only serious, in my opinion, the problem is that there is no obvious and very confusing system for calculating the software. In one degree or another, this is all euro, but in Nuremberg, it is observed most clearly. Looking ahead, I will give an example: Ira scored only 5 by, although during the game it was not particularly and lagging behind me and Julia. Yulia has a result 34. It seems to me that it should not be so, the benefit should be visible in the game process, and not disclosure after counting. If you only sat down for Nuremberg, then understand the feasibility of certain actions from the point of view of which they will bring, in fact it is impossible. This is perhaps the only drawback.

I liked the mechanics - it seems to be the usual exhibition of workers with the choice of location, but interestingly implemented. On three in the game there are 4 locations (guilds: brewers, buns, shoemakers, fabric producers). Each player in front of its progress in a closed (map) chooses the guild (AI), in which he wants to take action. Then the cards open and players in order begin the move. You can act only having assistants on the hands, after the action is done, the assistant remains on the roof of the guild to the end of the current round. It is initially given the 4th assistant, but you can get during the game up to 8.

Assistants can sell, buy goods, as well as hire the guests of the guilds that give bonuses. After players performed actions in the selected location and if someone else had assistants, they can be planned again and perform actions. As soon as the assistants are over, or all participants saved, the round ends. Then everyone takes their assistants from the roofs of the guilds and the new round of which is only four in the game.

Masters

I was pleased with the design - a weight-in-law hides in itself the good-quality components from thick cardboard and gigantic on the standards of the wall figures made of wood. At the same time, the components seem to do not cause interest, but when everything is laid out on the field, the sensation of the holistic composition is created.

No matter how well it sounds good, but only me like me, Julia and Ira did not recognize her. And I can understand them - "Nuremberg" is too heavy (in all senses) toy. It can be very conditionally attributed to a family format - it's rather Evardcor. Even "Terra Mystic" on her background looks more friendly. On the other hand, the game is remembered, something in it is unusual, let it lies to a new case.

PS. I liked the idea with the safe (in the photo at the top) - unlike the traditional "screen cells", here the money is the only resource that you need to keep secret - simply covered on top. Convenient, although if the player does not have money left at all, it is easily calculated.

Shovels.

Explain to me, please, "high reeigulation" and "conflict and high interaction of players" in Terra mysticism.

Explain to me, pliz that I missed and what I did not see. If here is a big interaction, then compared to what? From the fact that I played, almost any game surpasses Terra on interaction and jammed.

Not all games with war - in cubes. There is with controlled random or without random.

In the game in the four-fold, without taking a toe + 2 per houses, you often played in a certain scenario. And it is in the first turns of 1 round.

Look at the bga experts. See a lot of examples.

Looked up a lot of records of parties on BGA and YouTube. From a similar snowball, I saw only when players were clearly with a big zadro-level difference. Those. One is clearly stronger, the other is clearly weaker. As a result, a snowball. Neither in neither the snow chess as a rule does not occur when the masters of one level play. Snowball is a consequence of a different level of players. Where one simply does not see and does not understand what they can do with him and does not take anything. A player of a good level will be such things to see and pitch in advance. If the game has the effect of a snowball in good players of one level, then it is rather minus games, because The game is simply not flexible. In go, you can play the first full page, and then win. In chess too.
But the question about the balance of races remained. Here many people write that races are unbalanced. Then what game is praise, if this mathematics will break the game?
True, I myself did not notice any imbalance in races for my parties. Just each needed my unique approach, but it is in any game with asymitric parties. I won in the terra of any army, the breakdown has not yet seen. But what was embarrassed - so these are bonuses for the round - they can go to someone in the suit, there is no one.
Accidentally, not because of this, below wrote about the auction of races?

\u003e 70-80% of the success of the game in Terra depends on how efficiently you dig in your tablet.

No, not at all.

I don't really like the "Terra Mystic", there are obvious shoals: unbalanced races, demandingness to the number of players, dull megakoschel with glasses bonuses in each round.

Still as decide. Four - five experienced players can be so a party to play in Terra mysticism, precisely with an emphasis on control of the territories that Kemets with kikladami will nervously smoking on the sidelines. But for two three, Area control is certainly turns into water. That is why they always advise to play the maximum composition or at least four. In Terra mystics control of the territories a special highlight of the game. Special for the fact that the mechanism itself of this control is beneficial from classical games to control the territories. In such games, the mechanism is simple: put the chip into the territory and it is yours. And in Terra mysticism, thanks to the "repainting" of foreign land in his own (the mechanism of which is directly taken from such an elegant section of mathematics as the theory of graphs), makes the game of the game very interesting and fascinating, and the main thing is gambling, dramatic and moderately conflict.

Plus a non-scale map on the number of players. How did they allow in such a "great" game? In general, something does not converge. If a brilliant game is not dissatisfied, then it is impossible to call it ingenious.

\u003e You seriously want to say that in Terra controls the territories is also critical, as in Kemet?

\u003e The "Terry Myti" control the territories is also the essence of the game itself and the meaning of the game, and in the "Kemet" it is just an insignificant detail to the rest.

In Kemet, specific territories are the most important source of software. Indeed, an insignificant part)

Those. The same race in one scenario may be significantly stronger than himself in another scenario.

Plus, as said the effect of a snowball. In the first round, did not take the desired piece of soil and the following five watched, as others played.

The game is good, but very demanding. Too demanding. Plus the player level should be equal. Those. You can get pleasure, but you need to prepare well

Any game with normal and above the level of difficulty, with decent playability is very demanding. To the one who is afraid of this, only one will remains: playing children's games.
Serious games require a deep understanding of it as the game itself, experience in concretely, and a common understanding that you can and what can not be done in games (understanding what kingmeking is, for example).
Not everyone needs serious games, someone in them is hard to play. And not interesting.
Not everyone needs family, Fillers. Someone is easy to play in them. And not interesting.
Pick up such as interesting to you, and your friends. After all, the most important thing is communication. And so that it is the most pleasant and long need to like everyone.
Thank God, the choice of games is a huge and every one can pick up a successful combination of complexity, mechanic, setting, etc.
And it's great.
P.S. The modern level of chess development is such that if playing at a high level, then you need to know and keep a huge whole debut in my head, their variations. Most ordinary mortals do not need it, while no one says that chess is a bad game. Just not everyone needs it at the deepest level. And in the stands. Games with high relaignation gradually opens the depth, which did not suspect. That is what for many and allows you to lay it again and again.
But, as in chess, players located at different levels of understanding, as a rule, is not interested in playing with each other. These are the opposites of such games. And this is normal. Wolves are afraid - not to walk into the forest. At the same time, it is not necessary to climb into the thicket. Someone and forest park is enough.