I'm glad you mentioned that other decision for the attacker--I agree!

We were taught the game, so I didn't learn it from the rulebook, but I relied heavily on the 4-page reference guide (it was nice that each player had a guide). I thought that overall the reference guide was very helpful, though I was still tripped up by some of the more fiddly timing rules like when I can spend resources to gain bonus benefits and when I'm allowed to rearrange resources on my mat. There were also a few mechanism I relied on the teachers to remember, as they were a lot to grok conceptually without seeing them in action (like when a city is overrun).

@@jameystegmaier agree on the reference guide - our running joke (after we understood the rules) was: “cmon guys, it’s a 2-page rulebook!” 🤣

True! Though, as I understand it, you can only spend resources for benefits/actions before taking your primary action (the "prelude" phase of your turn), a caveat we frequently overlooked.

@@jameystegmaier yes, after playing a card but before spending pips. It seems a bit peculiar, but because of how Psionics let you copy a lead action, the Prelude phase lets you really twist the gamestate by doing something normally impossible! :) We usually track them by playing them directly on the card as it is played.

I appreciate you sharing your history with those games! I'm fine with Root (I think its asymmetry is brilliant, but there's just a lot to do/resolve on every player's turn), I really didn't connect with Oath, and I appreciate Arcs--I think it might be Cole's most refined game yet, though it still asks players to remember quite a bit (not necessarily due to lack of notes, but certain things that could have been more fluid are not--for example, you can spend resources for extra benefits, but you can only do it during the prelude phase of your turn, something we consistently missed). But it has some really interesting mechanisms--combat at the top of the list--and I hope you enjoy it!

@@jameystegmaierI appreciate that insight.

I'm happy with just the one play of Arcs, but if it's the primary choice for others at game night and they need a 4th, I wouldn't turn it down.

Having played Root, Oath, and Arcs, I can relate to what you're saying. Now that I've played Arcs, I think it's the most streamlined of the bunch, but its still a lot to keep track of. There wasn't a moment in the game when I didn't feel overwhelmed, and despite it being streamlined, there are lots of fiddly things to remember (rules exceptions and the like). Each player has a book as a reference guide (not just a card), which is very helpful...but it's still a lot. And it did not feel like a trick-taking game (we had a big discussion about that after the game--it's almost more of a "follow action" game with your available actions randomized (though each player does have the option of playing a card face down as any 1 action, which is good but can feel weak if other players are consistently taking multiple actions based on their random hand).

Arcs (the base game) is totally symmetrical. All player play by the same rules. there's like only 7 different actions. It's much much lighter than root and oath. When you add the leaders and lore cards you ad in some asymmetry. and then the campaign game is crazy asymmetric. but the base game, which is what you should try first if your interested by the game : is not much more than learning 1 root faction basically.

I never liked Root asides from the style and Arcs is absolutely amazing to me. Have played the game so many times in the last week and can't stop thinking about it.

I really appreciate all of your feedback. My takeaway is that I should find a way to watch a playthrough or to try it out before I buy it. Certainly I think that the base game being symmetrical is a huge plus to learning the game. Fiddliness and rule exceptions, on the other hand, can raise the barrier of entry for lighter gamers and steal some of the fun from your first several games when mistakes and confusion grind the game to a halt. But not necessarily a deal breaker if the pay off is great.

@mattjenkinscomic Preorder right now. I believe it's September delivery for retail.

In our game, someone attempted to attack/raid me and failed miserably--they lost far more than I did. That left them vulnerable, so on my turn I did the same--and did really well. This was a massive swing and a huge setback for that player in the category that was going to score the most poitns that round, largely due to luck. Honestly, this felt similar to the bad luck of not having a higher card in the lead suit (if that's the case, you can take at most 1 action from the card you play). The only agency you have there is to become the lead player...but the easiest way to do that is to have a higher card of the lead suit, so it's a bit of a catch-22.

That's true! I should have thought about that, having played it fairly recently.

Is there any value to having them as trophies, or it just feels cool?

Absolutely! One of the possible scoring opportunities in the game involves having the most trophies.

@@joelface if the Warlord ambition is in play, then at the end of the chapter, the player with the most trophies gets the points. If the Warlord ambition is not in play, then when the chapter ends, players keep all their trophies!! This means that destroyed ships only recycle back to their player’s supply when the Warlord ambition is scored!! This adds risk to every attack involving the red and orange dice, because you could potentially benefit an opponent and/or hamstring the ability to build new ships. It also introduces a meta game element where an attacker can “sacrifice” their ships to put a different player ahead of another for the Warlord ambition. For example, say you are in first place and want the player in fourth place to win the Warlord ambition. You could attack their 3 fresh ships with your 3 damaged ships, and roll the red dice. If you roll the intercept symbol, all your ships get destroyed and the fourth place player gains 3 trophies. In the campaign variant it gets even crazier because you can trade trophies to other players for other things. Players also keep their trophies between acts (games) and only return them when the Warlord ambition is scored at the end of a chapter.

Please note that I try to find something positive about every game that I play (for the purpose of this channel)--my videos are not an overall indicator of how much I enjoy or recommend any particular game. You can check out my ratings on BoardGameGeek for that. :)

I'm here to discuss standout mechanisms I really enjoyed about the games I play, not the elements I don't connect with. I'm happy I had the one opportunity to play Arcs and learn from it! :)