We played one game and he ended up conceding on turn 12. (Games typically last around 20 turns.) I don't think I was guaranteed to win the game by any stretch (though if you take the 30 point buffer into account I probably couldn't lose) but I was certainly in a strong position. Knowing I wasn't going to get an iron meant I had to play a little differently, and I ended up focusing heavily on getting more actions and stockpiling research for age II. I used the actions to pick up extra cards which generated minerals themselves so I was able to function pretty well without iron. Coal (the upgrade to iron) came up very soon in age II and I'm pretty sure my opponent had a chance to grab it for 3 of his 4 actions but didn't.
He then started up a second game. This one was a little weird in that both of the iron cards were near the bottom of the age I deck. He picked up an iron card on turn 7 and played it on turn 8. I picked up and played coal on turn 9. So really, we were both playing the game without iron, but I'd been planning on not having an iron and was better positioned since I had focused on other ways of making minerals with actions and leaders. I had Leonardo as my age I leader and he gives you a research per turn and a mineral every time you play a tech card.
He stuck out the second game a little longer but eventually conceded it as well. In this game I don't blame him though as I don't think he had a chance of mounting a comeback. I'd built a really ridiculous military lead (Napolean was my age II leader and I got an early air forces in age III to go with my hussars tactics card. My military was 40 to his 15.) He also got a very powerful age III leader himself but I had the assassinate card and immediately killed off Sid Meier. When he scooped I was up 60 points, was making 5 more points per turn, and was making more research and food than he was. The turn before he gave up I also played an attack to steal all 8 of his minerals for the turn!
He ended the game with this parting shot...
"thanks, I won't be playing with you ever again. please do not ever join or contact me for a game. all the best bye"
Ouch! I wasn't taunting him or even saying anything at all in chat in either game. All I did was argue with him in the initial game that you didn't need an iron and then beat him twice at his own challenge. Oh well!
So, do you need iron? Clearly the answer is no, but I'm not sure it's as clearcut as these games showed. Both games were a little weird in terms of when coal showed up. We were also playing with an expansion and in both games I made good use of an expansion card. (The first game I played an age A leader which made all action cards better and I generated a fair number of 'free' resources that way. The second game I played an age A leader that got buffed so he was just straight up a civil action every turn. My tactics card at the end which let me get such a huge military lead was also expansion only.) Also, in both games I built the pyramids as my age A wonder and it really feels like it's just the best. (It gives an extra civil action every turn for the whole game.) Especially when you won't get an iron that extra action a turn helps with playing more cards.
Perhaps most importantly I'm just better at the game than this guy is. In the second game he took Genghis Khan as his age I leader. Genghis makes all your mounted units stronger and makes them generate points. (I'd used him in our first game to build up my lead.) But after he took Khan both of the knights cards were on the board. One was going to cost me 1 action and disappear if I didn't take it. The other was going to cost me 3 actions. So I took the one that cost me 3 actions and then Khan was useless for all of age I. It also made most of the tactics cards in the deck useless for him as well since they mostly need mounted units.
Through The Ages feels like it should be random enough that anyone can win any game but the more I play the less I believe that to be true. There is some randomness, sure, but it really feels like one of the more skill intensive games around. I still haven't beaten Robb yet!
Do you need iron to win? Not if you're better than your opponent, that's for sure. I'm less convinced if you're on equal footing...
I recalled they posted statistics about the game at WBC and went to check last year's write-up. Unfortunately it only broke down the winning percentage of leaders, wonders, and governments but not techs. On the other hand I read the recap of the final and the winner, Randy Buehler, was the one person in the finals who didn't get an iron. But that may just be more evidence that you have to be better than your opponents to win without iron? I do hear he's pretty good at games...
No comments:
Post a Comment