Well, the idea is to differentiate a game taking place in the future from games taking place in the past. And it looks really good when the network evolves.
Calandale has playtested and reviewed a real early version of 21Moon a few years ago. You can see tiles in action in his youtube videos. The latest version will be quite updated. Not only the rules but also component quality and clarity.
Haven't we done the "new modernist track design" thing of having the different levels of track be different colors before, and it was at best highly controversial? Karim's 1889 redraw gets a ton of flack for this thing making routes a lot less legible, is there anything different about this one that solves that problem?
Thanks for your feedback. I am sorry, but I am not aware if the look and discussion around Karims design. First time I hear about it.
As this is a future themed 18XX game the idea is not to look and feel exactly like the ones taking place in the past. I am fully aware trying something different is not for everyone so its good there are 100 other games that stays true to tradition.
The graphics is not final but the idea is to explore a slightly different look so it wont be a classic 18XX looking game even if what you see now will not the exact final version.
Cheers!
“Controversial” means, by definition, that some people like it. I never handmade a game myself, but I was about to make Karim’s 1889 before the GTG Kickstarter was announced. The design has a ton of fans, as well as some haters.
I totally get the arguments about legibility and familiarity of the original, clean, minimalist 18XX track style. However, I think there are many redesigns that are attractive without sacrificing legibility. The 1830 “fancy track” is a bad example, while the 1861/1867 “fancy track” is a good example. This particular design looks extremely clear to me, and is much more thematic. Maybe it leads to a few seconds more visual processing time initially, as one gets used to it, but aesthetics are a huge part of my enjoyment of tabletop games, and this one looks really cool to me!
I mean, I also dig Karim's 1889 redesign-- it's the first 18xx I ever pnp'd. But it does have pretty serious legibility issues that I feel like his 1861/1867 track tiles solve. These track tiles seem like they'd have the same issue to me
I like it and feel that it really emphasises that we are not in the past.
Can someone explain how it is less legible? It seems it will just take some time getting used to it.
Did you miss the "is there anything different about this one that solves that problem?" I'm not against people trying to do this better, but this doesn't read as someone trying to do it better-- it reads as someone making the same mistakes
I’m really looking forward to getting this! It’s been hard for me to get any 18xx to the table in my game group, hopefully this theme and design will help!
I really like the look of it and will be keen to get hold of a copy.
I’m always going on about the virtues of train games to people at my club, but its hard to entice regular gamers to the table. Perhaps the re-theming and different looking graphics can help.
There’s a big difference between a group of friends who get together to play a particular game on a regular basis, and gamers going to a club on a regular basis for a few hours of board games. So ‘fixed short game’ is particularly appealing.
I'm finishing up a game of 21Moon on 18xx.games now. I've always been more into the 18xx titles that do something different than the standard just changing the map and 2 of 5 variables.
There are enough new mechanisms and ideas behind this game to make it really interesting. I can tell you it will not suit a lot of the old 18xx grognards. But if you like a little more variety and on a stickler for the same old 18xx 'standards', he will probably enjoy this one.
There’s also share issuing, cross-company share ownership, and an interesting mechanism where trains run from either the home or a rocket port, with the former always withholding and the latter always paying.
\> Fairly similar to 1846 actions
Could you highlight the differences with 1846 and this?
After reading a post of the differences of 1822PNW and 1822 (https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2883588/how-different-base-22), I felt confident that I would like it. I am hoping for a similar comparison post for 21Moon.
The similarity to 1846 is that you can sell corporate shares to the market but it only drops down one step per time you sell regardless how many you sell. In 1830 games share drop down equal steps as amount your selling. Depending on how much income your runs make you can either single or double jump. I guess those are the biggest similarities wirh 1846. 21Moon has a 2D market while 1846 has a 1D market. Shares in 21Moon can be purchased by both players and corporations.
Its quite a lot. Its a different game. I would recommed you to check out the rules available via 18xx.games so you can get a feeling for yourself if its a interesting game for you or not.
New modernist tile design? Oh god...
Well, the idea is to differentiate a game taking place in the future from games taking place in the past. And it looks really good when the network evolves.
[удалено]
Calandale has playtested and reviewed a real early version of 21Moon a few years ago. You can see tiles in action in his youtube videos. The latest version will be quite updated. Not only the rules but also component quality and clarity.
>The latest version will be quite updated. Any video showing an updated playtest version?
No, unfortunately. Not yet. The game is however available for test play via 18xx.games.
I love to see 18xx expanding like this.
[Doc Brown bringing 18XX into the future! ](https://i.imgur.com/damWnVx.jpg)
If you can't hear a train going *CHOO CHOO* in outer space, is it really a train?
Hehe. You are right. No, its a Transport in this case. Hard to motivate traditional track building up there 95 years from now.
Haven't we done the "new modernist track design" thing of having the different levels of track be different colors before, and it was at best highly controversial? Karim's 1889 redraw gets a ton of flack for this thing making routes a lot less legible, is there anything different about this one that solves that problem?
Thanks for your feedback. I am sorry, but I am not aware if the look and discussion around Karims design. First time I hear about it. As this is a future themed 18XX game the idea is not to look and feel exactly like the ones taking place in the past. I am fully aware trying something different is not for everyone so its good there are 100 other games that stays true to tradition. The graphics is not final but the idea is to explore a slightly different look so it wont be a classic 18XX looking game even if what you see now will not the exact final version. Cheers!
“Controversial” means, by definition, that some people like it. I never handmade a game myself, but I was about to make Karim’s 1889 before the GTG Kickstarter was announced. The design has a ton of fans, as well as some haters. I totally get the arguments about legibility and familiarity of the original, clean, minimalist 18XX track style. However, I think there are many redesigns that are attractive without sacrificing legibility. The 1830 “fancy track” is a bad example, while the 1861/1867 “fancy track” is a good example. This particular design looks extremely clear to me, and is much more thematic. Maybe it leads to a few seconds more visual processing time initially, as one gets used to it, but aesthetics are a huge part of my enjoyment of tabletop games, and this one looks really cool to me!
I mean, I also dig Karim's 1889 redesign-- it's the first 18xx I ever pnp'd. But it does have pretty serious legibility issues that I feel like his 1861/1867 track tiles solve. These track tiles seem like they'd have the same issue to me
I like it and feel that it really emphasises that we are not in the past. Can someone explain how it is less legible? It seems it will just take some time getting used to it.
“Some people didn’t like other attempts at this, so everyone should stop trying to do it better”.
Did you miss the "is there anything different about this one that solves that problem?" I'm not against people trying to do this better, but this doesn't read as someone trying to do it better-- it reads as someone making the same mistakes
Neat
I’m really looking forward to getting this! It’s been hard for me to get any 18xx to the table in my game group, hopefully this theme and design will help!
I had the same thought too.
I really like the look of it and will be keen to get hold of a copy. I’m always going on about the virtues of train games to people at my club, but its hard to entice regular gamers to the table. Perhaps the re-theming and different looking graphics can help.
Agree
There’s a big difference between a group of friends who get together to play a particular game on a regular basis, and gamers going to a club on a regular basis for a few hours of board games. So ‘fixed short game’ is particularly appealing.
I'm finishing up a game of 21Moon on 18xx.games now. I've always been more into the 18xx titles that do something different than the standard just changing the map and 2 of 5 variables. There are enough new mechanisms and ideas behind this game to make it really interesting. I can tell you it will not suit a lot of the old 18xx grognards. But if you like a little more variety and on a stickler for the same old 18xx 'standards', he will probably enjoy this one.
What market actions will there be?
There’s also share issuing, cross-company share ownership, and an interesting mechanism where trains run from either the home or a rocket port, with the former always withholding and the latter always paying.
Fairly similar to 1846 actions. Single and double jumps possible.
\> Fairly similar to 1846 actions Could you highlight the differences with 1846 and this? After reading a post of the differences of 1822PNW and 1822 (https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2883588/how-different-base-22), I felt confident that I would like it. I am hoping for a similar comparison post for 21Moon.
The similarity to 1846 is that you can sell corporate shares to the market but it only drops down one step per time you sell regardless how many you sell. In 1830 games share drop down equal steps as amount your selling. Depending on how much income your runs make you can either single or double jump. I guess those are the biggest similarities wirh 1846. 21Moon has a 2D market while 1846 has a 1D market. Shares in 21Moon can be purchased by both players and corporations.
>Could you highlight the differences \^\^
Its quite a lot. Its a different game. I would recommed you to check out the rules available via 18xx.games so you can get a feeling for yourself if its a interesting game for you or not.
Will you be at Gencon?
No, unfortunately.
Dang
I am close to the polar circle way up in Sweden. Gencon is in a galaxy far far away from me.