Love the theme (it's a bit refreshing), love the setting and from the info on the news page the mechanics and gameplay seem to involve lots of fun interaction with the other players, be it conflict, negociation and maybe fragile alliances?

Love the board design and that it doesn't seem to have trillions of chits. But don't get me wrong, I love having lots of tokens, cards and dice all over the table but in this case it seems FFG didn't overburdened the game.

Looking forward to this game and just from what I saw it is probably a buy on release game for me.

LOOKS SO… SO… COOL ;-))) waiting for game rules

looks like another really cool spin of of risk me and my frends love these kind of games . I love these type of games cant wait to see how it plays.

I have the original Borderlands game and all it's expansions from EON. The reprint looks like a very close copy of the original complete with the expansion material. The expansion islands are now part of the base map and it looks like the airships are also part of the new game.

The original suffered from a bland map and cheap cardboard components. The reprint seems to have a awesome map and great components, at least from the notice picture. The new retheme is great, fantastic,… This game is a must buy for me, even if I already have the original, simply for the great graphics.

The game, if it's like the original Borderlands, has some dice luck with resourse generation but is really more a negotiation game. There is also some chess like strategy. It isn't really much like risk but a beast all to it's own. I'd describe it more like Settlers of Catan with direct player to player combat thrown in.

I would call it Settlers of Catan + Diplomacy. It predates Settlers, obviously, but was actually inspired by Diplomacy and was intended to be a quicker game with a similarly simple, luckless combat system (though it is turn-based, not simultaneous like Diplomacy).

For those not familiar, you can have one warrior in a territory, and he has one strength. Weapons, horses, etc. all have strength bonuses, and these too you can only have one of each in the territory. You attack an adjacent territory and other players next to the defending territory can offer their strength to either side in an alliance system like Cosmic Encounter, except without any reward whatsoever (well, you could promise them resources in the next trade phase, but the game won't force you to make good on that promise, if I recall correctly).

That's (pretty much) it! There is a combat shipment that can be made (looks like it is called Spearheading now, from the product page), but that is the only added complexity there is. No combat die roll, no cards. Sounds maybe too simple, but the negotiation and alliances elevate the game well above the basic mechanical level.

Only played the game once, but really looking forward to getting to play it again with much, much better components.

Adam said:

So, the more you are around the gaming table, the bigger the fun and the complexity of the game, correct?

Julia said:

Probably the more Beer you have helps too. I'm not sure how much of a Game you have with only 2 players (which is my usual Gaming mode).Have to wait to see the Rules.

OD

Old Dwarf said:

::laughter:: a good, belgian beer helps always.

Still, my doubts reflect yours: most of the time I play solo or with my husband. The steampunk theme is very fascinating, though. Guess we should wait for the rules to be up.

I know I'll be following this game's updates. It looks like it could be tons of fun.

If you are unable to wait any longer, just look up the original Borderlands on boardgamegeek.com. The rules are probably there. Aside from the theme, this doesn't look like a huge departure from the original, so you'll get a good feel for it. I always describe it as Diplomacy + Settlers of Cataan.

I have only played the game once or twice (once was with terribly wrong rules -- completely my fault, not the game's), both times with four-five players, and I am not sure I see how this could be a particularly great two-player game, at least with the old rules. I doubt it would be bad, but if I had to guess, it would probably not be something worth buying strictly for the two-player game.

I do recall the rulebook having a section, amusingly, to basically justify and defend the two-player game. It said something to the effect of (from memory): "Though designed as a game for several players, the two-player game is excellent and offers a more chess-like game."

I sold off the game when I heard this was coming several years ago (very pleased to finally see that wasn't a mistake), so my memory may be doing it a disservice, but I thought it funny. I would have liked to try it but just never got around to it.

Well, that's the case of many 2-X players strategic games and it's understandable. Games like Talisman plays well with 2 (from my experience and personal opinion) since each player tries to beat the others to the Crown. Sure with more players the PvP aspect of the game is more present but 2-player games doesn't break the fun.

In games like Gearworld (I presume) or Civ/Eclipse or other strategic/conquering games, 2-player can feel odd. Civ/Eclipse 2-player almost always have to be played agressively and you have to spend some time building an army in order to dissuade or defend yourself or attack the other players. But play these 2 games with 4+ and it shines a lot and let you develop more freely your faction.

Gearworld might be that case where it's "meh" with only 2 players but shines with more.

We'll see and cant wait for more previews.