Time management, eclipses and the end of the game
The game is divided into three eras: on the board there is a timed path of 13 squares (0-12). A white token is placed on the zero, while the black token is placed on the 12 (or 11 in 3 or 10 in 2). Each time it is the first player's turn, or each time there is an ascent, the white token moves forward. When the 2 tokens overlap, the era ends (in some cases you still make a turn) and the eclipse phase takes place: a first count of points. The markers on the pyramid construction track are reset to zero (they start from 0 at the beginning of each era) and then the second era is restarted, advancing the black token by one space and returning the white to zero.
Once this one is finished, another score, then we proceed to the last era, advancing again the black token. After the third eclipse the game is over.
The game, regardless of the various eclipses, ends even when the construction of the pyramid is finished
The calculation of points
- Points for the Avenue of the Dead: at each eclipse the level reached on the Avenue of the Dead is multiplied by the lowest number visible in the row of buildings to be built.
- to every era the player more ahead in the track construction pyramid ago 4 points
- each player at each era multiplies his position on the pyramid track by 4 in the first era, by 3 in the second and by 2 in the third
- finally you give points for each set of different masks
Only after the third era or after the completion of the pyramid are the bonuses given by the prayer track (penultimate or last level) "seen".
The winner is the one who gets the most points and in case of a tie, the one who gets the most cocoa.
Teotihuacan and Tzolkin
Come on: you can't avoid to write two lines of comparison between these two giants if only for the pre-Columbian setting so dear to the author. Surely in the basic structure are 2 very different games: the system of the wheel of Tzolkin nothing to do with that of Teo that remembers more 'the themes dear to Gerdts. Here it could be said that in common, even if with completely different development there is the possibility to strengthen the actions: in Tzolkin it is enough to leave more turns the worker on the wheel, in Teo it is enough to arrive, in more turns, on an action space with more dice and if then they are of high value even better. In both then there are three paths to pray to the gods with important end points, in both finally must feed the workers. Different instead is the management of the buildings (Tzolkin) and of the technologies (Teo) even if some finalities are enough similar.
Now what is better between these 2 games I do not say it because first I do not know, then because I would really enter a minefield that is not worth to cover.
Teotihuacan: playability
Common destiny to successful games is the fun of the most skilled gamers to crack the game, that is to find strategies that follow step by step lead irremediably to victory: on the other hand there are other gamers who are looking for ways to counteract such strategies. In essence, the game is put under the magnifying glass and shredded in every aspect and fatally, inevitably loses some of its appeal.
Our author then, after having seen pages and pages of X-rays of Tzolkin has thought of a variable setup, given by the free arrangement on the board of action cards.
This obviously goes to the advantage of the playability of Teotihuacan because 'hardly we will find ourselves playing the same games and consequently will always need different strategies.
The playability is therefore quite high, the rounds are fast and the games flow generally smoothly, a little time is lost in positioning the tiles of the pyramid or the steps (you have to look for the best combinations to maximize the points and is not an immediate thing) and here in general something always happens that I find nice: between players you help to find the best accommodation. a moment of spontaneous collaboration not expected and not required but that gives a touch of humanity 'which substantiates once again the big difference between the gdt and console games.
Strategies
There are many ways to make points and so one of Teo's risks is to gyrate a bit empty doing a bit of this and a bit of that. It doesn't usually lead anywhere. My suggestion, after 9 games, is simply one: look carefully at the tiles alchemy (or technology, call them as you like) look at the advantages they give and play on those. I noticed that starting with a good dose of gold (the start of the player is variable: you take the starting material by choosing the starting tiles) and spend it immediately to make sure immediately in the first rounds the most 'important tiles alchemy then allows you to good combos or advantages that during the game will always pay off. For example, in a recent game the combo (obtained by placing the tokens on the tiles) pay one less matter for the construction of the pyramid more 'advance on the path of one of the Gods every time you put a piece of the pyramid was successful. Obviously, after a few rounds, the opponents also noticed this, but clearly when they did it it was too late.
If you decide on a strategy that you like, do not waste time. In Teo if you stay behind recovering can be very difficult and it can happen that the third era only becomes an opportunity for regrets: there is therefore, especially if you play with less experienced players, the problem of the leader who starts to play on his own already in the middle of the second era.
The masks: the mechanics of the points collecting sets of masks, in my opinion, is a bit weak: it is true that the count 3 times at the end of each era but meanwhile the masks cost and then it is not easy to find and grab 7 different ones. Sincerely I struggle a little to understand the sense of this choice that at the end of the day is a bit attached them, end in itself, without finding a why in the dynamics of this game. Obviously playing only on those you can also win but only if the opponents have not read the board well. Against the above combos, my experience says that you can never make it by playing on masks.
Key" actions: generally trapping your own die for one of the key actions is a delicate choice that should be made only for a specific sense and purpose. Doing it at the beginning of the game is generally just a style exercise, but during and especially towards the end of the same will certainly happen moments in which to do it: it will be necessary for example to take a step on the path of the gods
which could allow you either to climb into one of the 2 summit spaces or have basic subjects or other victory points. In short, evaluate them well at the beginning of the game and then always keep them in mind: sooner or later they come in handy.
Dice management
From a certain point of view, although it is clearly a product intended for gamers, Teotihuacan's rules are not so complex and can be learned quite easily in about twenty minutes. What remains more complex is to play it well keeping in mind the many facets and opportunities that offers players. Some of them we have already seen but a particular eye to the management of the die must be given because, I remind you, the face of the die will determine the power of the action. For this reason you will realize soon enough that it is not enough, during a game, think about the action to do, but also the strength with which you will do it and this depends on the face of the die / s that you use. Above all, if you go to a location with 2 dice, it will always be the one with the lowest value 'to command.
As if that were not enough, the dice can then also determine the duration of the game influencing, as we have seen, the management of game times in case of ascension.
Some discussion was born then on the usefulness 'of the 4 dice: someone believes that it may not be useful since there are already' three that turn around for the scoreboard, it could also be true but I do not see why give up a priori to a dice that already starts with face 3. I also think that having 4 around helps in case you want to resort to a "key action" because then you can 'forget about the dice trapped without affecting the game.
Interaction
Definitely low, it consists of fishing for available cards and the number of cocoa to be paid before doing an action or to be cashed in the event you want to collect it. Whatever' there would also be in the possibility of reaching the top of one of the paths of prayer, and some other small detail. However, especially in the first era, before developing your strategy, you will look closely as the opponents move I assure you.
Number of players
Well, three and four are the best of them, it doesn't rain on them. In 2 with some adaptations provided by the manual (tokens of other colors scattered on the board to emphasize the cocoa appearance otherwise non-existent) turns discreetly: it can be of satisfaction ....
Speech apart deserves the game in solitaire, mode specially created by David Turczi, one who understands great games, just think, one of many, Anachrony.
You play against a bot that will do 'actions dictated by the launch
(this time you) of 2 dice.
It sounds interesting but at the moment I'm not going to dwell also because I haven't tried it yet.
I will certainly do it and I will dedicate a test on the road to show you how it deserves.
Graphics and materials
You have a lot of disagreements about the graphics. Some people think it's poor and single-stringed. Certainly accustomed to the glittering colors of Marco Polo and Tzolkin here everything appears quite shaded and over everything prevails a light yellow charo that pervades even the entire manual. Personally I find it relaxing and, I will say a foolishness, but it helps the concentration. In addition to that, 'go and look at the photos, also remembers the natural color of the archaeological site
In my opinion, however, the visual impact as a whole is remarkable, evocative and classy, then, for God's sake, I leave it to you to judge: look at the photos and decide.
The board has icons that explain many details of the game and are, you will see, easy to read and understand once you learn the basic rules... The manual is clear and done quite well but it squadronizes that is a pleasure.
To conclude
Better or worse than Tzolkin, better or worse than Marco Polo? I leave the choice to you, personally after 9 games we still play super gladly and without a doubt, but I do not find out, it is one of the best games of 2018.