Game Review: Ostia
By Rick Thornquist
March 29, 2006
Publisher: Pro Ludo / Mayfair Games
Designer: Stefan Risthaus
Artist: Harald Lieske
Players: 3-5
Ages: 12 and up
Playing Time: 60 - 75 Minutes
Game Played: Review Copy
Number of Plays: 4 (3, 4 and 5 player games)
Ostia is a card game that combines a few mechanics - auctions, set collecting, and blind bidding. Central to the game is the deck of resource cards which are a number of different types - wood, wine, ivory, etc. There is also money in the game, to be used for the auctions, and victory point chips.
During each round, each player is dealt some resource cards. A player then decides which of his cards to auction off and which he will keep. There are a number of auction rounds where each player’s cards are auctioned.
After the auction rounds, your cards are allocated secretly - to the Forum, where you get money for them, or to the Senate, where you get victory points. You can also allocate some to be saved for the next round. The allocated cards are revealed and, depending on what everybody has allocated to where, players get money and victory point chips. A certain number of rounds are played and whoever has the most victory point chips at the end wins.
The game certainly works, but I had a few problems with it. The game felt to me like an endless series of auctions - which may be fine for some people, but I would have preferred more than that (I had the same problem with Industria). The allocating of resources is basically blind bidding - you can use a little strategy to allocate your resources for maximum results, but you are at the mercy of what the other player do. It’s all a bit of a crapshoot - you may get lots or you may get nothing.
I also had a few problems with the components. The quality is there, for the most part, but the game comes with a set of boards which, while nice, are pretty superfluous. The paper money that comes with the game is small and flimsy - it could have been done better.
In the end, I thought the game just didn’t have enough strategy to keep me interested . I would say I thought it was just okay. Others found the game about the same - I didn’t find anyone who thought it was very good. Those who don’t mind lots of auctions and blind bidding may find something here, but for me, I’ll give it a miss.
Posted by Rick Thornquist on Mar 29, 2006 at 08:01 PM in Game Reviews, In-Depth / 842
Comments:
To comment, you must register with BGN. Registration is free, but donations are greatly appreciated!|
I played this for the first time last night, here are some thoughts: 1) The quality of the components is confusing. On one hand you have beautiful player boards (superfluous or not) and appealing wood VP tokens, on the other hand you have some of the flimsiest money ever made (I have been known to hyperbolize from time-to-time) and sub-standard card stock. Of course components do not make a game. Additionally I rather like the player boards, if for no other reason they contain almost all of the rules, which I find helpful. 2) There are a couple mechanics in this game which, upon hearing, I thought would be marvelous, but in fact didn’t seem to work at all. Most notably each player receives two cards which have normal backs but are essentially blank cards. These cards are used to confuse your opponents when bidding blindly (they won’t know how many cards you are offering). The problem is no one is really looking at what their opponent is doing while figuring out what to bid… so this cool sounding mechanic falls flat. In addition the bidding is effectively simultaneous, if my opponent chooses cards to bid, then I choose mine, he has the option of changing his bid, this cycle continues forever and the only way out is for both of us to bid simultaneously. In this case the blank cards are completely useless. 3) I am a fan of auctions, and blind bidding, but this game didn’t offer novelties in either. The auctions are Santiago style for no apparent reason, I think a straight up open auction would work just as well, if not better. The blind bidding, while interesting, is certainly not inspired. This last sentiment applies well to the game as a whole, uninspired. Posted by Jonathan Benjamin on Mar 31, 2006 at 02:37 PM | #
|
Next entry: Game Review: Bonobo Beach
Previous entry: Game Review—Audio: Betrayal at House on the Hill
