Rating: 7.25 out of 10 based on 12 ratings
You can review this board once you have completed a Public game
Ratings
26 Sep 2018
Loved playing on this board. Even getting off to a very poor start you don't feel like you're out of it (or at least you shouldn't). Not sure it would be enjoyable 1-on-1 but can be recommended for multiplayer.
Reviewed by Litotes 
Superb
Superb
Loved playing on this board. Even getting off to a very poor start you don't feel like you're out of it (or at least you shouldn't). Not sure it would be enjoyable 1-on-1 but can be recommended for multiplayer.
6 Nov 2015
This is a great board. It engages you with the other players, it encourages a mix of defensive and offensive gameplay and it's easy on the eyes.
I wish starting position wasn't so important - or was easier to overcome - and for that reason I could only give it a 7.
However, I like the look and I like the core mechanic. Grab a station for a little bonus and connect them for a much bigger bonus - this makes for a variety of importance in the modules, and some tactical gameplay in many different situations.
So: a great board - with good rating.
This is a great board. It engages you with the other players, it encourages a mix of defensive and offensive gameplay and it's easy on the eyes. I wish starting position wasn't so important - or was easier to overcome - and for that reason I could only give it a 7.
However, I like the look and I like the core mechanic. Grab a station for a little bonus and connect them for a much bigger bonus - this makes for a variety of importance in the modules, and some tactical gameplay in many different situations.
So: a great board - with good rating.
5 Aug 2015
Great concept, problematic execution.
I also don't find the graphics that great. Many of the troop-count numbers are hard to read, and although I LOVE the attempt to blend player colors with the board graphics in the transfer stations, in many cases it makes for a hard time telling who owns what.
Worse, though, is that the stations don't start neutral. Not only does this give an advantage to players who get a good starting layout, it exacerbates the disadvantage of going later in the turn order. In larger games it's quite possible to find yourself in a huge hole before you've ever had a turn.
Great concept, problematic execution.I also don't find the graphics that great. Many of the troop-count numbers are hard to read, and although I LOVE the attempt to blend player colors with the board graphics in the transfer stations, in many cases it makes for a hard time telling who owns what.
Worse, though, is that the stations don't start neutral. Not only does this give an advantage to players who get a good starting layout, it exacerbates the disadvantage of going later in the turn order. In larger games it's quite possible to find yourself in a huge hole before you've ever had a turn.
7 May 2015
I'd like to give this a higher rating, but the game is far too dependent on your starting positions... In my opinion the stations should be all neutral at the start of the game, so no one has an advantage by having ownership of extra stations
I'd like to give this a higher rating, but the game is far too dependent on your starting positions... In my opinion the stations should be all neutral at the start of the game, so no one has an advantage by having ownership of extra stations
20 Sep 2014
Numbers on the pipes are a little difficult to see, but I enjoyed the hub-to hub vision, which allows you to try and figure out who has what and figure out who is winning.
Numbers on the pipes are a little difficult to see, but I enjoyed the hub-to hub vision, which allows you to try and figure out who has what and figure out who is winning.
8 Feb 2014
Board is good (some numbers hard to read near pumping stations), name for colors are unique in a good sense. 3 transfers would be better like most of the other boards.
Board is good (some numbers hard to read near pumping stations), name for colors are unique in a good sense. 3 transfers would be better like most of the other boards.
5 Jan 2014
A challenging board, best for patient players.
On the default setting with a bunch of players you can't see much at all, and the game takes a long time to get going. The hub-and-spoke design makes this different from many other large boards. Also, the vision from hub-to-hub means figuring out who's where is a bit of a brainteaser.
I guess I'm in the minority, but I think the weakest part of this board is the artwork. The pipes are a little small and the numbers at the hubs are hard to read. If anybody's playing grey, white or black as a color, they get hard to see. (Nygma, maybe you could remove these colors as options?)
A challenging board, best for patient players.On the default setting with a bunch of players you can't see much at all, and the game takes a long time to get going. The hub-and-spoke design makes this different from many other large boards. Also, the vision from hub-to-hub means figuring out who's where is a bit of a brainteaser.
I guess I'm in the minority, but I think the weakest part of this board is the artwork. The pipes are a little small and the numbers at the hubs are hard to read. If anybody's playing grey, white or black as a color, they get hard to see. (Nygma, maybe you could remove these colors as options?)
23 Oct 2012
Not sure why I find this board so compelling. The design seems to suit a lot of player interaction in different sections of the board. Unfortunately, random starting positions can put people on a number of troop-generating spots to start off, while others have virtually nothing. It might be cooler if the stations were all neutral to start.
Not sure why I find this board so compelling. The design seems to suit a lot of player interaction in different sections of the board. Unfortunately, random starting positions can put people on a number of troop-generating spots to start off, while others have virtually nothing. It might be cooler if the stations were all neutral to start.
