...I got my copy on saturday and eagerly opened the pack and enjoyed all the contents(save for 2 of the bikes with bad pins(meaning they wheelie without "permission))

We sat down and put together the first track and while we were only using the standard rules the game just didnt seem to be that fun. Yes is was enjoyable but after about 4 laps into the game the guy in the lead had a blowout and the rest of us couldnt catch him.

What am i missing i wanna believe this game is great but after playing a great racing game in FORMULA D i dont see the complexity in this game. Please help!!

We played this game at Gen Con in August, and thought it was very boring. If I remember correctly, the ages were 6 and up or 8 and up. That should have told us something. Also, most of the pieces were not in the game, they had to give them to us separately.

Stick with Formula D!

We played Tuesday night with our regular group, and had a blast. Got in two races, using the 'expert' rules. I pushed the heck out of my bike in the last two laps for the win. It was great. Try the 'expert' rules.

TK

Tim,

We did play the "expert" rules. We still could not find the strategy to the game. I think the re-play on this game is going to be very very low!

To us, it just seemed like a dumb down Formula D on Motorcycles. Which could be a little fun, but ...

On a side note - I am very much looking forward to the new expansion for Tannhauser.

Bern22

I just got the game, and we played yesterday with my local group and we also had a blast using the "expert" rules.

We used an "expert" track, and the additional features in the track made it a great game.

I won it on the very last corner of the last lap (5 players) with players #3, #4 and #5 only 1 turn behind me and the guy that got 2nd.

During the course of the race I never crossed the finish line first on any lap except for the last, to win it.

We will be playing a lot more.

I believe that most with any racing blood in their veins would like this. There really is just as much strategy in it as Formula D. In Formula D all of the real strategy comes before you roll the dice. In Moto it comes after.

I think there is plenty of starategy in the game.

To compare Forula D and MotoGrandPrix I would have to say I like, and own, both games. Each has a very different feel to it. I am glad I own both.

In Formula D you are pushing your luck kowing that you must also satisfy the stopping conditions in the corners, managing this, as well as when to use your brakes, tires etc is the key element of the game and is what makes it fun. Will you risk losing brake and tire points by rolling the larger (and faster) die, or will you be conservative and hopefully change up a gear coming out of the corner?

In MotoGrandPrix players can flip the dice onto it's opposite side, this means that all players, if they choose carefully, should be bunched fairly closly on the track. The key aspect in MGP is also managing corners, but instead of having to stop in a corner, the condition is that if you are stopped in a corner, the way you can or can't flip the dice is changed. In the advanced game this will see players choosing to burn tires to slow down before a corner so they have the ability to potentially flip both dice and accelerate out of the corner, or alternatively, using engine points and back tire points to push through a corner so they can accelerate through the next corner or along the straight.

In MGP the basic rules are rubbish, the advanced rules are excellent, and I like some of the expert rules and am unsure about some others. The game adds in slip streaming (good), modifiers if the bike accelerates through a corner, a set of three dials measuring front and rear tires as well as engine (for braking, accelerating and side slipping in corners), as well as a bunch of rules for making the already impressively varied tracks even more varied still.

The production values in both games is wonderful, but MGP just takes the cake here, the bikes are wonderful - on stands that allow them to lean, as well as wheels that spin etc. Aside from the nice toys it also has an absolute mountain of track. I also think the game would be excellent (and potentially more tactical) in it's team mode.

Both games are top notch in my view, and I am glad to own them both. Both games are about risk management, but both approach it differently. It feels like Formula D is asking you how fast you want to be shooting into a corner, while MotoGP is asking you how you want to approach each corner.

As I said, I really believe that the Standard rules and the Expert rules (I think that is what they are called) are the best.

I think there is strategy here, due to the restrictions imposed by corners, it may be benefial for a rider to burn tire points to stop prior to the corner (allowing them more flexibility with the dice flipping), or engine points to move through it (for the same outcome), in addition to this are a range of concerns about the extra costs of overtaking in corners (an aspect that can be manipulated in team games), Slip Streaming and losing control (Wheelies and side slipping). I haven't even started on the addition of rises and descents into an already very flexible system. Strategy may seem to be non-existent or small (it certainly did on my first lap or two), but really I think it is a case of it being subtle. For me the ability to flip dice means that the bikes are generally going to be reasonably bunched - and the race is all about positioning yourself to make best use of the ability you have to flip dice, as well as burn through engine points where needed to push ahead.

In team games there are additional tactics to do with slip streaming, deliberate blocking in corners and the use of wheel and engine points. All in all I am very happy to own MotoGrandPrix, it is one of my favourite race games.

Cheers,

Giles.