The Pleasures and Tortures of - Heroes of Land, Air & Sea

So is this sort of like a Clash of Cultures thing but with more specialized sides? Like a hyper Clash: Civilizations game?

I think I understand the RTS analog in digital space, I'm just not as clear on how it plays in board game space.

The RTS part is mainly from the narrative you described---upgrading your base, sending out villagers to get resources, moving up a tree of buildable speciality units. Which is identical to StarCraft, command and conquer, etc.

This game seems so much like Warcraft et al that I'm left wondering why one would play it rather than its computer-based brethren? What does it do better than the games that inspired it?

Warcraft or World of Warcraft? (They're different beasts.)

From your review, HoLAaS sounds *very* much like Warcraft, which also has the ability to be over in a couple of hours (usually less), to try new races and strategies, and play with friends. But it also allows for complexities and features that a board game could never hope to implement.

I too prefer board games to electronic ones (at least in general), but there are certain games that work so well in one genre that it seems odd to recreate them in another. (But hey, you're enjoying the game, so maybe it isn't so odd after all?)

Definitely WarCraft, not World of WarCraft.

I have to disagree with the marketing here, it totally isn’t at all RTS like. The aesthetic is definitely Warcraft III inspired, but the only gameplay bit that comes from WarCraft is that you need certain buildings in order to build certain units. That’s it. It has by far more in common with the 4X genre, though on a much, much lighter scale. I know of a few fantasy 4X games on the PC, like Master of Magic, Age of Wonders, etc, but this is more like a fantasy version of Civ.

That said, this is a really fun game. It’s definitely designed by someone with Euro sensibilities because you get points for doing anything, which bugs me, but the system it runs on is really clean and sharp. It’s one of those games that has a lot going on but the barrier to entry on rules is very low, and all your turns feel pretty important. The turns are also pretty fast most of the time, you’re doing one thing, other players may follow it and you’re moving on to the next turn. This is a double edged sword, as it is in all games that last longer than an hour. The pacing of your play seems fast, but the overall game pace can seem slow after you realize you’ve had so many turns and it feels like you’ve accomplished so little. If you’ve ever played Scythe, you’ll know what I mean. And the game is way too long, that’s really the biggest knock against it. The gameplay warrants at most 90 minutes, the 2+ hours (and it really is more than 2 hours more often than not, even after you’re familiar with it) it takes is way too much.

I’d be happy to play it again and I’m glad Uba ones it so that I don’t have to, but I’d really like to see what would happen if the game were to get a second edition somewhere down the road after folks have played it for 5 years or so. It could be a top tier entry in the 4X genre at that point.

I think the RTS comparisons are fine and appropriate.

The follow action gives a sort of dynamic flow to the game. The unit trees and buildings are reminiscent of the genre. The way your units can pop out between towers feels arcadey. The resource system and unit production remind me of RTS'.

It's not real-time, sure, but I don't think it's a poor comparison.

I didn’t find anything confusing about the blog at all, and my chiming in was to clarify to Greg and then share my feelings about the game. I almost backed the game on its first KS and I know they were really trying to push that WarCraft inspiration all along, which we can all agree is kind of ridiculous. It certainly *looks* like WarCraft but the gameplay doesn’t really evoke anything similar to WarCraft. That’s their marketing and I know that it isn’t your assessment.

No need to change your style to appease anyone, if they have a problem with it, f*ck ‘em.

My comments weren't critical, ubarose. Your review was great. I was just trying to understand the ways in which they tried to translate RTS to the tabletop. My clash of civ comparison actually sounds kind of weirdly ok now that I read up on it.

Article made sense to me. Obviously it can't be a straight up Warcraft-to-tabletop conversion. Sounds like it does a solid job of what it actually aims to do.

It's really weird to see a massive Scott Almes game. Have to wonder how many Tiny Epics he had to sign off on before they'd start production on this monster.

Greg Aleknevicus wrote: Warcraft or World of Warcraft? (They're different beasts.)

From your review, HoLAaS sounds *very* much like Warcraft, which also has the ability to be over in a couple of hours (usually less), to try new races and strategies, and play with friends. But it also allows for complexities and features that a board game could never hope to implement.

I too prefer board games to electronic ones (at least in general), but there are certain games that work so well in one genre that it seems odd to recreate them in another. (But hey, you're enjoying the game, so maybe it isn't so odd after all?)

As Uba said you create for all the people who have no interest in playing a computer game, who prefer to game face to face with friends and family for the fun that generates. And because they sell it means that is a totally valid reason (I'd buy this if the price was right but wouldn't even consider playing it on a computer).