Each player receives a dry erase board showing a 7x7 grid. There are 12 entrances onto the grid, three on each side; half of the entrance points are marked for streets, while the other half are marked for railroads. The game is played over seven rounds. In each round, four dice are rolled, determining four different patterns that each player must draw into four squares on their board. There are road-only paths, railroad-only paths, odd intersections of the two... and six special squares that don't come from the dice, that you can use three of over the course of the entire game. Your goals include connecting entrances, making a long street and railroad track, filling up the central area of your board, and closing off any unfinished paths by the end of the game. Each of these goals is worth points, with the player who scores the most winning the game.
I've developed a skepticism of most "roll-and-write" games. In the interest of faster play and accommodating a high number of players (both worthy goals), most of these games opt to present every player the exact same choices at every stage of the game. Railroad Ink does the same, with every player having to draw the same 28 rolled squares (and having access to the same 6 bonus squares) by the end of the game. It's theoretically conceivable that everyone could make identical decisions at every step of the way, resulting in a complete tie -- indeed, every player has the exact same path to victory, if only they'd done exactly what the ultimate winner did.
Of course, it's not practical that all players would make the same choices all throughout a game. And Railroad Ink does a better job here than many "roll-and-write" games, by presenting everyone with so many choices to make all at once each round. The downside there is that it can take a while to figure out where to draw all four squares (and whether to use a bonus this round), so there can be a notable gap in time between the first and last players to finish in a round. Still, I think the possibilities here are good for the game, and it moves faster anyway than it would if players weren't taking turns simultaneously.
But the core of my criticism is this: I don't enjoy that no player can at any point in the game make a decision that has any impact whatsoever on any opponent. There's a puzzle-like quality here than can certainly be satisfying, but I don't feel it quite scratches the "game" itch for me. Does this really take "up to 6 players," or is it just a solitary activity that 6 people can participate in at once?
Still, I have played a couple times now, and have at least enjoyed Railroad Ink on those puzzle terms a bit more than other games in the roll-and-write genre. Plus, if my group keeps playing, Railroad Ink does have more yet to offer us. Different editions of the game come with different "natural disaster" types of complications (on additional dice) that you have to work around. My group has been playing the "Blazing Red Edition" of the game, though we have yet to actually use the Lava and Meteor expansions it includes. Meanwhile, the BoardGameGeek community seems to think the "Deep Blue Edition" is superior, to the point of rating it several hundred spots higher on the charts. (Two more new editions are coming this year.)
So while roll-and-write continues to generally not quite be "my thing," Railroad Ink is certainly a game I'm more open to playing again than, say, Welcome To or Super-Skill Pinball. It just feels to me like the choices are more meaningful here. And so I'll score it a touch higher, at a B-. That said, it sure feels to me as though people who enjoy the genre more than I do would also like Railroad Ink. So perhaps it's worth checking out in your gaming group.
No comments:
Post a Comment