|
Alhambra.
Wednesday night sees Phil Kendall winging his way through the gloom of West Yorkshire via the M62 to the heart of darkest Bingley. The splendidly named Tom Thomson and chums lie in wait.
A chance encounter with wife of said Tom whilst Phil Kendall was 'selling' games at a craft fair ('selling' being the word closest in approximation to what seemed to involve making small-talk with other similarly disenchanted stall-holders) led to a visit from the great man himself (who also bought a copy of Viking Fury - stout fellow - cue the large Tony Curtis horn effect and much dancing on oars) ('oars' I said). Not only that but a generous invite to said Bingley. One month later, promises become reality.
It's always interesting meeting up with a different gaming group from the one you're used to. The offering of alcohol by the arriving guest is a particular case in point. The guest producing a bottle of very acceptable Merlot usually produces one of two responses: wide-eyed astonishment . . . 'very generous, but we don't usually . . . ' etc, etc - or 'do you want some straight away?'. Fortunately in the case of Tom it is the latter.
Introductions concluded, a Michael Jacksonesque moment ensues. 'Come upstairs and have a look at my game collection'. Truth to tell, it is an impressive sight - over three hundred titles. A brief return to playground bubble gum card country ('got that, got that . . . and that') before Kendall shows his lack of breeding ('How much do you reckon they're worth?) but no real damage is done. Armed with St Petersburg, Volldampff, Funchenschlag and Alhambra the intrepid two return to the guests.
It is to be Alhambra. This is a new one for the Ragnars. And very nice it is too. It has a dash of Prince of Florence about it in that you're buying squares of palace, laying them out in front of you and struggling to get the right thing in the right place. It does have a very nice buying system to it though, in that four tiles are available each player turn - one for each denomination of money. The money is similarly laid out - four different cards per turn. In a turn, you take a tile or take a money card. All nice and simple. The twist lies in the fact that you get an extra turn if you pay the exact amount for a tile. Nice one - suddenly the low value money cards become useful, because they allow you to pay this exact amount.
And that's about it. There are different colours of tile - the player with the most of one tile gets the most points etc etc. There are lots of points for the player with long walls around his palace, and three scoring points within the game. Good stuff.
A damn good game follows. Weighing in at about 90 minutes, this is not bad at all. Others have played it before, but in that wonderful tradition of the Ragnars (and possibly boardgames players the world over) the game is punctuated by cries of "are you sure we played that last time" and "this didn't seem as neat last time". Phil Kendall affects an assurance that is totally misleading, but somehow manages to fluke third place. What seems to be a devastating points scoring play in the endgame (picking up two tiles in the divvying out at the end - they go to the player with most money left) is actually a complete cock-up on the blue money ("I've got six", "nine!", "just eight!", "erm . . . twenty-three?") and a jammy orange tile. But no one is to know.
Finally, a good game of 6 Nimmtwith seven players. This is also a new one on the Ragnars. Apparently it's a 'classic', and has actually been re-released for its 10th anniversary. A damned good system.Lots of tension, much moaning and rolling of eyes, and extensive mockery of anyone who gets shafted. Tom has the challenging task of playing his own hand and advising Lewis (13 year-old offspring). The end result produces much eyebrow-lifting - Lewis comes last, and said father wins at a canter. But it would be churlish to call foul.
A good evening, hopefully to be reciprocated. It remains only to thread a way back along what passes in Bradford for a ring road.
Another outing for the doughty game.....
Tonight’s game is ‘Alhambra’, which won Spiel de Jahres in 2004. Not for the box, however as this is a garish orange and oversized (depth-wise) for the components. Paul and Liz are quick to relate that they have been to the Alhambra, and that the box art-work doesn’t begin to do it justice.
There is already a review of the game on the web-site, so no need to rattle out the rules here. Paul and Liz haven’t read the review; so they do need to be rattled. Paul is classically Paul in pronouncing, ‘I’ve got it’, when barely half way through the details. Liz excuses him, claiming that a couple of drinks with their Italian restaurant meal (how they live it up, even on a Thursday) had affected Paul’s brain.
Dorittos with salsa dip prove popular; even for Paul and Liz. Kendall enthuses that the dip is ‘morish’. ‘Just like Alhambra!’ quips Dicken. It is agreed that this is a good enough joke to go in a review.
Other notable moments are:
Paul building five Chambers, making his site look decidedly National Health Service.
Paul trying to do more than one action on numerous occasions, always followed by ‘Can’t I do that?’
Liz giving Paul a cuddle, eyes glistening (Paul’s).
Dicken remonstrating with himself about a move being ‘too risky’; it turned out to be buying a 2 point building for 9 points (Dicken is careful with his ducats you know).
At the final count-up Dicken wins by five points from Kendall, with Paul and Liz some way behind but separated by the same margin. Kendall notices that Dicken has included in his tally a Tower that sits on his reserve card; Kendall demands a recount. Final final position is Dicken 105, Kendal 104, Paul 92, Liz 91. How cosy.
How good is ‘Alhambra’? Played throughout two Kendall family holidays during 2005, it obviously has much to commend it. Easy to play, with plenty of decision making and a good deal of ‘other player awareness’ if not interaction. It has a good length and structure, well-balanced and pleasing mechanics. The components feel good. Yes, a very good game.
Kendall finds it frustrating, Paul agrees. Dicken says he doesn’t allow himself to become frustrated because ‘it’s not that sort of game’ (by this he means it’s a gentle game that doesn’t engage the competitive spirit too much). Liz says something similar. In short … something is frustrating. Partly this is because deep down (actually not very deep) everyone knows that having the exact amount of money to pay for buildings is the key to winning. OK, you can do other things beside, but an extra turn is an extra turn in any game. So unless you manage to pay with the exact amount, you always feel to be losing out. Or … you’re doing something other than building – which means you’re not building, which is (after all) the only way you can win anything.
Not the end of the world.
Go to top of page
|
