2010-15: Railroad Tycoon / Rails of the World (-10)
A largish drop for Railroad Tycoon after playing Steam: Rails to Riches, which is essentially the same game, with better mechanics but less theme and worse components. Too bad I care more about mechanics than theme/components.
Narrative Theme: 7. A big full-color map, plenty of plastic trains, and cards with train engine types and names of tycoons definitely convey that you are trying to build a train network and make lots of money.
Mechanical Theme: 6. The track-laying rules mostly make logical sense, and many of the tiny quibbles I had were allayed by 2nd Edition (a.k.a. Rails of the World). However, the pick-up-and-deliver system has never felt particularity logical to me. (Why can't I deliver red cubes to blue cities? Why do I get a bonus for creating connections between certain cities and delivering a good, but only if I personally own all the connecting track?) And don't get me started on income going up, then down, then back up again, based on how many victory points you have amassed.
Price v. Component Quality: 8. Your online price for Rails of the World is $49, as compared to $44 for its sister games Age of Steam and Steam: Rails to Riches. That's an extra $5 very well spent. The production quality is completely over the top, and the board itself is enormous. The box is easily twice the size of either of the other two; more like 4 times the size.
Rule Complexity: 6.5. In order, I'd rank the complexity of railroad game families as follows: TransAmerica (2) - Ticket to Ride (4) - Mayfair's Crayon Rails games (5) - Age of Steam (7) - 18XX (9). Railroad Tycoon is on the shallow end of the Age of Steam family. It's harder to teach than Basic Steam, but easier than regular Age of Steam. The Western Link rule, in particular, throws people off.
Depth/Replayability: 7.5. With two expansion maps/games out (Europe, England), both of them better than the original Eastern USA map, and with the built-in randomness of what cards come up, where cubes are placed, and which Tycoon you start as, no two games are going to be alike. There's an awful lot to explore in the Age of Steam system.
Mechanical Elegance: 6. Age of Steam had a lot of clunky bits. Railroad Tycoon shaved many of them off, but added a few of its own (namely the Western Link and pile of cards up for auction). The result is a system that runs fairly smoothly, but not as smoothly as Steam's.
Length vs. Enjoyment: 5. The Age of Steam family are games that encourage Analysis Paralysis. And Railroad Tycoon has a rule that basically allows you to extend the length of the game at will (by re-adding cubes to empty cities, where the game end condition is X number of empty cities). But the most damning problem is that Railroad Tycoon, play-time wise, works best with 3-4 players, but the base Eastern USA map works best with 5-6. So games almost always run just a little longer than is fun.
Other indefinables: Those big chunky "this city is empty" markers are completely superfluous, but I think they're awesome. Other people hate them, because they're so big that they can block your view of the board. Which, in case I haven't mentioned it, is so huge that you need an entire dining room table to play it on.
Best for: People looking for a medium-heavy train game with lots of "toy factor."
Avoid if: You have a small table, or don't want a game that could run 2-3 hours.
Narrative Theme: 7. A big full-color map, plenty of plastic trains, and cards with train engine types and names of tycoons definitely convey that you are trying to build a train network and make lots of money.
Mechanical Theme: 6. The track-laying rules mostly make logical sense, and many of the tiny quibbles I had were allayed by 2nd Edition (a.k.a. Rails of the World). However, the pick-up-and-deliver system has never felt particularity logical to me. (Why can't I deliver red cubes to blue cities? Why do I get a bonus for creating connections between certain cities and delivering a good, but only if I personally own all the connecting track?) And don't get me started on income going up, then down, then back up again, based on how many victory points you have amassed.
Price v. Component Quality: 8. Your online price for Rails of the World is $49, as compared to $44 for its sister games Age of Steam and Steam: Rails to Riches. That's an extra $5 very well spent. The production quality is completely over the top, and the board itself is enormous. The box is easily twice the size of either of the other two; more like 4 times the size.
Rule Complexity: 6.5. In order, I'd rank the complexity of railroad game families as follows: TransAmerica (2) - Ticket to Ride (4) - Mayfair's Crayon Rails games (5) - Age of Steam (7) - 18XX (9). Railroad Tycoon is on the shallow end of the Age of Steam family. It's harder to teach than Basic Steam, but easier than regular Age of Steam. The Western Link rule, in particular, throws people off.
Depth/Replayability: 7.5. With two expansion maps/games out (Europe, England), both of them better than the original Eastern USA map, and with the built-in randomness of what cards come up, where cubes are placed, and which Tycoon you start as, no two games are going to be alike. There's an awful lot to explore in the Age of Steam system.
Mechanical Elegance: 6. Age of Steam had a lot of clunky bits. Railroad Tycoon shaved many of them off, but added a few of its own (namely the Western Link and pile of cards up for auction). The result is a system that runs fairly smoothly, but not as smoothly as Steam's.
Length vs. Enjoyment: 5. The Age of Steam family are games that encourage Analysis Paralysis. And Railroad Tycoon has a rule that basically allows you to extend the length of the game at will (by re-adding cubes to empty cities, where the game end condition is X number of empty cities). But the most damning problem is that Railroad Tycoon, play-time wise, works best with 3-4 players, but the base Eastern USA map works best with 5-6. So games almost always run just a little longer than is fun.
Other indefinables: Those big chunky "this city is empty" markers are completely superfluous, but I think they're awesome. Other people hate them, because they're so big that they can block your view of the board. Which, in case I haven't mentioned it, is so huge that you need an entire dining room table to play it on.
Best for: People looking for a medium-heavy train game with lots of "toy factor."
Avoid if: You have a small table, or don't want a game that could run 2-3 hours.