Hello! By means of introduction, I’m Matt, and I like board games an awful lot. I run an Instagram account, Don’t Eat the Meeples, and I write and podcast about my local soccer team (Real Salt Lake) at RSL Soapbox. I’m a software engineer by trade, too.
And now that we’ve got that out of the way, I should probably also note that this is my second run at a board games newsletter. I wrote one two-ish years ago for a few issues, and it was mostly focused on curating links and finding the latest news. But you know what? There are lots of ways to get that news. I still want to talk about the news, but I’d rather discuss small bits of it.
News and Links
Sometimes it feels like a news section — especially right now — could just be a list of games being announced and open for backing on Kickstarter, but I don’t know how useful that is for you all. You’re more than capable of checking Kickstarter, and there are plenty of people who do a really excellent job curating content around Kickstarter that I don’t feel like giving you a short list of games I’m paying attention to adds much value to the conversation.
Instead, let’s talk about some other things that will hopefully be a bit more interesting.
First up, you may have noticed that the /r/boardgames community on Reddit has undergone a few changes. A number of the moderators resigned, and there’s a revived attempt to make the community a more actively welcoming place, and to remove some of the hostile, sexist and racist behavior that has too often permeated the subreddit. I’m very curious how well the new efforts play out, but I am cautiously optimistic that the community can improve. Below are some threads I’ve really enjoyed from Reddit this week.
What is your "I just don't get the hype" game? — I’m not usually a huge fan of threads that have a negative focus, mostly because I’m more interested in talking about games I enjoy than not, but that doesn’t mean there’s not something really valuable in meaningful criticism. There’s some of that here.
This truly delightful thread has a piece of art with board game references strewn throughout — it’s a super cool way to do a COMC (‘comment on my collection’, unless I’m terribly mistaken).
Other things this week that I enjoyed include:
The First Step Toward Change from Fertessa Scott at Girls’ Gameshelf is an excellent read and a valuable perspective on what women and people of color can sometimes face in gaming circles. Here’s a great quote from the article.
Being open to diverse people coming to your table is different from reaching out and bringing diverse people to your table. If I am drowning in a sea of uncertainty, be the lighthouse. Make it easy for me to know you’re an ally.”
Actualol produced a stellar video for Daniel Radcliffe that you are definitely not supposed to watch unless you’re Daniel Radcliffe himself, which you probably are not. (I mean, if he’s probably not watching Actualol, he’s definitely not reading this newsletter.)
I don’t have too much other news to talk about today — I know there was some, but I didn’t do a particularly great job at collecting it over the week. Expect me to do a better job in the future. Or don’t — that might get you closer to reality.
What I’ve been playing
Ligretto, a card-shedding game that’s played extremely quickly and anxiously — it’s a good time, but I’m not very good at it.
Fireball Island: The Curse of Vul-Kar, which had me knocking things down repeatedly and excitedly (for me, that’s the point of the game — knock stuff over!)
The Quacks of Quedlinburg, which remains silly and exciting and a super twist on push-your-luck and bag-building
Century: Eastern Wonders, a very cool pick up-and-deliver game with low complexity. I’ve yet to combine it with Century: Spice Road, but it’s high on my list. (And then, all three. I’m cackling like a mad scientist, but you can’t hear me.)
Azul vs. Sagrada
Last week, I spent a lot of time on Instagram talking about two of my favorite recent games about building beautiful structures in European architecture: Azul and Sagrada. I think it’s a coincidence that the two of them came out in shockingly close proximity (three months! Can you believe it?) — the world truly is an interesting place.
While both have some real similarities, there’s also enough of a difference between the two that I feel very comfortable recommending both for a collection. You could choose, and hopefully I can help people make a decision if they must, but you could also, you know, own both of them. (And all the Azul spin-offs — and the expansions, and … oh, I’ve entered into dangerous territory here.)
Anyway, a few points of raw statistical comparisons from BoardGameGeek. I recognize, of course, that there’s a significant self-selection bias on the site, but that doesn’t make it less interesting.
Rating: 7.9 vs. 7.5⠀
Owned: 65k vs. 33k⠀
Overall ranking: 43 vs. 147
Abstract game ranking: 1 vs. 9
Family game ranking: 3 vs. 19
What's really telling about these little bits of information, for me, is that both of these games are really well-regarded in the gaming community. Sure, one become a smash hit, while the other became simply a really great game with some critical success. In the grand scheme of things, both are potential classics. Maybe we'll revisit that in a decade. Maybe they'll have flying cars by then. Maybe…
One of my favorite things I talked about this week is how the two games compare in the way they occupy physical space. I’ll quote myself from Instagram here. (Edited slightly, but since I’m quoting myself, I will excuse it.)
One thing we don't talk nearly as much as I'd expect in board games is a game's footprint on a table, outside of the two extremes -- extra small games and extra large games. But I sometimes wonder if we should talk more about it. It's hard, of course, because unless the footprint is particularly odd or bad, it's not meaningful in most cases.⠀
⠀
But I'm reminded of something I learned about on an episode of Ludology (a truly magnificent podcast with designers Gil Hova and Emma Larkins, and the episode in question (episode 209) also featured Scott Rogers.) It's something Rogers describes as "the six zones of play", and he's written about the subject, as well. I think there's a meaningful difference between Azul and Sagrada in this regard, so let's talk about it.⠀
⠀
While we're slightly limited by the length of an Instagram post (so go listen and read more!), we can get into part of it. Azul exists largely in Zone 3, the personal tableau, and Zone 4, the board and shared space, particularly where factories come into play. Players have to interact with the shared space with regularity and manipulate pieces there. Some factories may be further or closer to the player, depending on their arrangement, and that could have an unexpected influence on which players take.⠀
⠀
Sagrada, on the other hand, exists primarily in Zone 3, with a reduced emphasis on Zone 4. With a dice tray -- a common practice with the game, and one comes with the 5-6 player expansion -- the core loop actually comes to Zones 1 and 2 -- the player's dominant hand and non-dominant hand, respectively -- and the decisions being made are literally made in the player's hand while looking at their tableau in front of them.⠀
⠀
Does it impact play? I don't know. I'd love to do a long-term analysis of Azul players and the factories they tend to draw from. That, however, seems like a lot of work. For now, it's an interesting footnote.
Maybe with all that behind me, I’ll start keeping notes on the factories players select from. But hopefully nobody who reads this and plays with me realizes I’m doing it to them. That would sort of bias the study.
I keep asking myself which of these games I prefer more, and I actually don’t think I can answer this. I think both games are excellent, and they both fit into my collection in different ways. I love the dice drafting in Sagrada, and I love having to plan my board for different scoring opportunities. Each game of Sagrada will end up different than the last (I mean, unless you don’t play toward the cards, but, uh, that’s probably counterproductive to consider.) Azul, on the other hand, has some novel ideas (the central drafting area is the thing that comes to mind), is a little nicer looking (to me, at least!), and is generally easier to teach.
I guess what I’m saying is that both games are great. Anyway, let’s wrap this up. Check out my Instagram for more on the topic, if you’re so interested. I wrote a lot of words about it.
Other things
I’ve been listening to a lot of jazz recently, and it’s been just such a relaxing thing to have in the background when I’m playing games. I’ll link some of my favorite albums recently below — is Spotify OK? I hope Spotify is OK.
Byrd’s take on “Just My Imagination (Running Away With Me)” is just masterful, too. That’s on the last album. I could list so many more albums, but I think four is probably sufficient. You’re not really here for the music, after all. (If you’re here at all. I have zero subscribers as I write this, as it’s the first issue.)
Well, now that we’re through all that, thanks for reading. Do subscribe if you’re interested. I’ll try to make this at least a bi-weekly thing, but we’ll see how it shakes out. And if you have feedback for me, don’t hesitate to reach out on Instagram or Twitter.
Stay safe out there!