Race for the Chinese Zodiac (Kickstarter Edition)

I am one of the designers of Race for the Chinese Zodiac.

Rating based on player count: 3-player variant: 7.5 4-player variant: 9 5-player variant: 8.8 6-player variant: 6 (exclude in player count of the game)

I enjoy board games that are highly replayable with a lot of player interaction. Based on my gaming experience, I feel that Race for the Chinese Zodiac fits in at around 9.

What I like about Race for the Chinese Zodiac: • Theme: The theme is based on the chinese legend about the Great Race. Each of the animal signs in the game are based on the legend and their special abilities are linked back to the story, where possible. I find the theme family-friendly and the game can be played by all. I enjoyed playing this game with my family (we had many playtesting sessions with them). • Replayability: Each animal has a unique special ability and the game set up varies from game to game. • Player interaction: There is a lot of player interaction during the game as players need to watch what their opponents has played and at the same time deduce what they may possibly play. These considerations are important in order to get ahead of your opponents. • Tense play: Many games see multiple players within reach of the finishing point. That is when the players get very tense about their decisions as they try to outguess one another in order to win the game. • Playtime: Short playtime (based on playtesting sessions, the game play usually takes around 45 min to 1 hour) • Simple rule: The game rules are simple but it requires a few plays to understand and appreciate the depth of the game.

Possible reasons why boardgamers may not like our game: • Learning curve: This game has a reasonable learning curve. An experienced player will enjoy a significant edge over a new player. • Gameplay experience: Sometimes a player may fall behind and this may affect their enjoyment of the game.

Rationale for the ratings of the different player count: We have made some adjustments to the game for different player count and the following are my personal opinions of how the game plays with the adjustments made. I have enjoyed 4-player and 5-player versions the most and that is also the reason why we decided to put this game as a 4/5-player game.

3-player variant

• The initial plays of the 3-player variant feels like a solitaire when each player is carrying out their actions due to the lower player count. The possibility of another player coming in to challenge a player at an action is reduced at this player count. (With ongoing playtesting - adjustments have been made) With the adjustment, the game feels more tense with 3-player. I find myself watching and trying to guess what the other 2 players could possibly play. That will in turn affects my decision on what cards to play.

4-player variant

• This is my favourite player count. We started the playtest at this player count and this is the foundation of the game development. Other player counts are developed from this version. Initially, I was quite neutral between the 4 and 5-player version. After many more plays, I find myself leaning slightly towards the 4-player version. I enjoy the decision space in this version as the risk and reward feels most balanced to me. There is sufficient interaction and excitement without feeling restrictive.

5-player variant

• This version gives rise to more interaction with an additional player to consider. We have made the non-movement actions a little looser as compared to the 4-player version to accommodate to the additional player count. With more players, one needs to be more careful of the action and energy card played in order not to be outbid by another player. It becomes very important to watch out what the others are doing as well as the large energy cards they have.

6-player variant

• This version feels too chaotic. The game play experience can vary widely. With more players, it becomes harder to avoid other players especially when you are weaker in term of energy. It can become very painful when the large energy card is used at the wrong timing. That could drag you down for a significant portion of the game. It therefore becomes a game of how do I avoid other players effectively so that I can maximise the benefits from my larger energy card. However, with more players it is not always easy to do this. Things can be quite incidental and the decisions do not feel that interesting as compared to the lower player counts. Additionally, it means that a player always have to look at what has been played by 5 other players before deciding what he want/can play. It is more taxing for the player to do so.

I am one of the designers of Race for the Chinese Zodiac.

Rating for 3 players: 7.5 (included in viable player count) Rating for 4 players: 9.1 (included in viable player count) Rating for 5 players: 8.5 (included in viable player count) Rating for 6 players: 6.5 (excluded from viable player count)

My rating of 9.1 is based on my favourite player count for my board game, i.e. 4 players. It also reflects how I feel about my board game, compared with my playing experience of other board games. My favourite lighter and shorter board games are Hive, Modern Art and For Sale, rated 9.75, 9.25 and 9 respectively. Up till now, Hive and Modern Art are the only two lighter board games that I enjoy more than Race for the Chinese Zodiac. I have a preference for heavier board games and still prefer our first design, Three Kingdoms Redux, which I rated 9.6, over Race for the Chinese Zodiac.

What I enjoy about Race for the Chinese Zodiac: • Game mechanics: Multiple layers of consideration goes into every play of action and energy cards • A lot of player interaction: Direct (outbidding) and indirect (watching what other players have played in previous round and remaining karma to deduce what they are likely to play) • Emotional rollercoaster: After 170+ playtests, I still experience highs when I manage to read and deduce other players' card plays and adapt my own card plays to take advantage of that :D, and lows when I discover I have been outwitted by other players :soblue: • Tense end game situations: Many of our playtests have seen a few players in the running for first place towards the end game, which makes for a few really tense and enjoyable final rounds • High replayability: The different setup positions and choice of animal signs to play with give a different feel with every play • Short playtime: Around 40-50 minutes with 3 players, 50-60 minutes for 4 players and 60-70 minutes for 5 players

Flaws: • Steep learning curve: It takes at least one game for a new player to get used to the wheel and the initial learning curve may be steeper than the average light game • Space: It takes up a bit more table space than the average light game

Thoughts on the different player counts: • 3 players: Player interaction is on the low side, even with the removal of one action, "Walk", and increasing the reward for outbidding to 2 moves. This is due to the game becoming looser with fewer players. There is a larger feeling of multiple player solitaire with the 3-player variant. • 4 players: This player count has just the right amount of tightness, resulting in a high amount of player interaction. There is also a good mix between strategic and tactical elements to this player count. The decision space, particularly those on when to use your high powered energy cards, can be quite agonising! • 5 players: Without any changes with the 4-player variant, the 5-player variant would be overly tight, resulting in "coincidental" outbids. However, the small change from "individual first" to "individual/joint first" for the non-movement cards solved this neatly. Player interaction remains high, as there is an additional player, but the aforementioned change still allows players to plan ahead to either avoid or outbid other players. The change has essentially changed part of the decision space, so the 5-player variant may feel significantly different from the 4-player variant. However, it remains highly entertaining and tense. • 6 players: Even with the inclusion of the change for the 5-player variant, the 6-player variant is still overly tight, resulting in plenty of "coincidental" rather than "planned" player interaction. A possible and tested solution was the inclusion of a new action, "Sprint", but that only solved part of this issue. Another issue is the variance between the first and last players can be particularly large, even between 6 roughly equal-skilled players. A possible and tested solution was the removal of the more swingy items from the benefits, but again, this only solved part of this issue. It also unfortunately made the 6-player variant dryer. As one may expect, the 6-player variant requires a lot of table space. Having to check 5 other players' played cards can be quite taxing. Lastly, the game becomes a more chaotic experience with so many players.

At the time of writing this, I have over 400 plays of Hive, over 90 plays of Modern Art and over 70 plays of For Sale. Race for the Chinese Zodiac has seen more than 280 playtests and casual plays (July 2019), and I participated in most of them. I do not rate board games until I have at least 5-10 plays of them.