3 Sind Eine Zu Viel!* (or 3’s a Crowd) is a small box card game from German publisher Amigo. It hasn’t had an official English release, but the cards are language independent and the rules are fully downloadable in English.

Listed for ages 10+ (I think 8+ should be fine) it plays well anywhere within its two-to-four-player range and a game lasts about half an hour. It sets up/packs down in a few seconds and is firmly in the ‘filler game’ category.

In the double-deck sized card box you’ll find 98 cards and a rulebook. The cards have a high quality linen finish (admirably standard for Amigo’s games) and while both the colour and design choices aren’t without their problems (see ‘key observations’) the cards are at least pleasing on the eye in a minimalist, pastel kind of way.

Teaching

In the great tradition of Amigo’s better card games, 3 Sind Eine Zu Viel! is not heavy on rules - it would rather let them get out of the way, so that the agony and stress can begin!

A deck of cards numbered 1-89 are shuffled and each player receives a 20-card draw deck. Beforehand the 0, 30 and 60 cards are placed in the central area of the table (they stay throughout), along with three random cards to get the ball rolling (placed sequentially as appropriate after the 0/30/60 cards). Any remaining cards are put back in the box and players draw a starting hand of eight cards.

Players now take it in turns to play a card into the central area, moving other cards as appropriate so that all cards placed are in numerical order.

If you place the fifth card into a row you take cards into your scoring area: the first in the row if you place the highest card, or all cards to the right of the one you place otherwise (so one to three cards total, as you never take the 0/30/60 cards).

As is so often the case in this type of light card game, 3 Sind’s scoring is the clever part. There are seven ‘suits’ (colours): collecting one card of a suit will score you one point, while collecting two will score you five points. Unfortunately, if you take a third card in a suit, they are all flipped over and you have to start again (so the fourth in a suit scores one point, the fifth five). And each flipped card will get you a minus point.

When each player has played six cards, everyone draws back up to eight from their draw pile. Once this has been done twice, and everyone is back down to two cards (so you each play 18 in total), the game ends. The highest score wins, but there are some pretty good bonus point opportunities thrown in to keep things interesting.

The four sides

These are me, plus three fictitious players drawn from observing my friends and their respective quirks and play styles.

• The writer: Comparisons to 6 Nimmt! are inevitable, but 3 Sind Eine Zu Viel! is important because it plays well with the lower player counts while offering a similar experience. I’d also argue it offers the player a little more control - either real or imagined - as you don’t have to play every card and you seem to have more choice in what you take. Generally it feels more subtle, while generating those same feelings of despair as you almost always end up taking something you don’t want.
• The thinker: If you get a good spread of cards this can offer an interesting and fun challenge, but there’s a good chance of getting a bum deal that gives you very few options. In a couple of games I’ve had most (six or even seven of eight) in one section, which can leave you in an awful position not of your own making. Of course this is a 30-minute card game, but it’s worth noting as this can drive you nuts! Overall though, a worthy addition to the Amigo family.
• The trasher: I enjoyed this one. There’s a bonus offered to the player who first gets at least one of each colour and it’s of course tempting - but it can also be a poisoned chalice. Racing to one of each for a 10-point bonus is great, right up until you realise you’ve got more than half the cards you want and it’s not even half way through the game! As for screwage, it’s fun to laugh as people are forced to take cards they don’t want but as you can’t see what they have it’s hard to set those things up deliberately - which would of course be more satisfying!
• The dabbler: Short, simple set up, nice colourful cards - so why did I walk away with a feeling of ‘meh’? 6 Nimmt! sets the bar for this kind of game very high and has more stand up, laugh out loud moments. 3 Sind Eine Zu Viel! is more subtle, and feels more strategic, and just doesn’t quite create the same atmosphere around the table. It also means that, although it plays well with two players, it doesn’t quite have enough mayhem to be a really silly, A+ two-player experience for me. A good game, but it wouldn’t be my first choice.

Key observations

Unfortunately, while the card stock is high quality, Amigo really dropped the ball with the card colour choices and artwork. Having seven suits shouldn’t be that much of a challenge, surely?

The cards are mostly white, with the number and a line-drawn smiley face all that adorns them. The colours are all pastels and even with relatively good eyesight and in a well lit room some are very hard to tell apart - especially the light blue, aqua and light purple.

To make things worse the difference between the faces is relatively subtle; some players don’t even notice they’re different until you point it out. As there is no theme, it boggles the mind that of all the graphical options they could’ve chosen (bold shapes, for example) they’ve settled on this.

Do you need 3 Sind Eine Zu Viel! if you already own 6 Nimmt? If you want a game that plays well with two to four, then yes - or if you’d just like a variant because you play this type of game often, again yes. Otherwise, I’d suggest you try before you buy.

Conclusion

I’ve enjoyed my plays of 3 Sind Eine Zu Viel! The mid-game bonus cards are a tantalising way of making the early game interesting, while the agony at the end is just what you’d expect from this type of card game.

On the flip side, there’s a little too much luck of the draw - largely because you’re not in control of what other players are laying, while you have no idea what they have in hand. This can lead to frustration, especially as the gameplay gives you a feeling of control and of decision making; at least more-so than its famous predecessor.

For now this is a keeper for me, but due to 6 Nimmt’s laugh-out-loud moments I doubt this will have that game’s staying power over a longer period of time. A good game for sure, but not a classic.

* I would like to thank Amigo Spiele for providing a copy of the game for review.

Welcome to the 2015 summary of my gaming year. It’s been a year of highs and lows, with the positives of a rising profile giving me access to more games being more than cancelled out by separating from my long term partner.

My game collection has increased to 165 (up 15 on last year) - a record high. But with at least 15 titles on or soon joining my ‘for sale‘ list, I don’t see this as growth - especially as when you take sales into consideration I’ve actually finished the year financially up in terms of game spend.

Game plays were down to around 450 from more than 500 in 2014. And the second half of the year was well down; when I lost my partner, I also lost my best gaming partner. Sadly, I expect 2016 to be lower still as this trend continues.

Overall I don’t think it was a vintage year for board game releases, but there were some significant exceptions. I’m yet to play Pandemic Legacy but have no doubts about its high quality; while 7 Wonders: Dual is clearly here to stay. More on Codenames below - while middle weight euros were well served with the likes of The Voyages of Marco Polo, The Bloody Inn, Elysium and Shakespeare.

There also seems to be a deepening, saddening move at Board Game Geek towards ameritrash titles - perhaps reflecting America’s growing interest in the hobby, but leaning firmly towards minis and hackneyed sci-fi/fantasy themes. With people going out of their way to sometime even publicly skew the rankings, I think the days of me taking BGG ratings seriously are over - unless they can do something drastic, or offer an alternative.

Best 12 not new but ‘new to me’ games of 2015

I managed to play more than 60 ‘new to me’ titles in 2015; many of them 2014 releases, but some going back to the nineties and beyond.

I’m surprised to be still finding so many gems in the board game back catalogue, even after playing more than a thousand different titles in seven years of gaming. Who knows - maybe my absolute favourite game is still out there, waiting for me to discovered it.

It may also be a reflection of my own taste in games being just as well served by older games; or that as long as it is ‘new to me’ it still feels like a new, exciting playing experience. With a few rare exceptions, I’m not feeling more excited about 2015 releases than I am about older games I’m just discovering.

Bought

• Yspahan: This is a fantastic euro game from 2006. In case anyone thought it was a ‘new’ thing, you use a shared dice pool to choose actions. You’re taking control of areas and there is competition, but not in the traditional sense. Unique and clever.
• Entdecker: The year after Klaus Teuber released Catan in 1995, he followed it with this exploration/tile laying game. It’s pretty wonky and luck driven, but when it’s this much fun and lasts about an hour who cares?
• The Dwarves: I’m not a big co-op fan, but The Dwarves has a good story and enough dice roles/actions to get around the ‘alpha player’ problem. It also has a really ingenious enemy movement that any game designer would be proud of. Scheduled for a UK release in 2016.
• Tash-Kalar - Arena of Legends: A proper thinky abstract combat game dressed in fantasy clothing, but none the worse for it. Really good with two or three players, its about creating patterns with your pieces to unleash attacks and/or score points.
• Spyrium: A pretty standard euro with a really nice twist: each player decides when to move from phase 1 to phase 2 of the turn, with different actions in each. This adds tension, making a limited pallet of options far more than the sum of its parts.
• Smash Up: It’s not big or clever, but it works. Grab two decks of cards (pirates, zombies, aliens, ninjas, kitty cats…) and shuffle them to make your deck - then battle for control of a series of islands. A daft, in-your-face, sub-hour card game.

Not bought (yet…)

• Kemet: I keep saying I don’t really like area majority games, then finding ones I like. This works because it lets you create great combos from a large selection, while forcing you to go forward and attack if you want to win. Really good fun.
• Xia - Legends of a Drift System: Possibly the stupidest, worst designed game I’ve played and really, really enjoyed. Every rule seems to have been channelled from a 12-year-old boy’s wet nerd dream, but somehow it works. Tremendously dumb fun.
• Amun-Re: This 2003 Knizia offering has all his hallmarks: pasted on theme, auctions, area influence and clever scoring. I think I prefer Ra, but this is definitely a game I’ll look to get regular plays of whenever possible.
• Sentinels of the Multiverse: Another co-op that largely avoids the alpha player problem, Sentinels does a genius job of evoking the super hero theme and suffers none from having all original heroes. Fiddly, but this card game is worth the effort.
• Hamsterrolle: It’s rare you’ll see me talking about a dexterity game, but this one deserves a little love. How do you make a wooden block balancing game better? Put it in a massive hamster wheel, that’s how! That kind of thinking needs rewarding…
• Quartermaster General: I somehow failed to play this in 2014, despite it being a London on Board favourite. Turns out everyone was right: a fast playing WWII card game where six players face off in two teams to decide the war - in an hour.

There were a couple of big names just outside this list, including Colt Express (good fun, just not really for me), Five Tribes (just too much AP to make the list) and Fields of Arle (solid, but just felt like more Rosenberg) plus some great fillers such as 11 Nimmt!, Sushi Go! and Tsuro.

As for last year’s list, I did end up buying Caverna, Africana and Lords of Vegas - and still intend to pick up Manhattan and Tumblin’ Dice.

My 5 favourite new releases of 2015

While I don’t think 2015 will be looked back on as a vintage year, there was some definite keepers for me.

As mentioned above, I haven’t tried Pandemic Legacy and 7 Wonders:Dual - and I’m not interested in a chunk of the year’s so-called bigger releases (Blood Rage, Forbidden Stars, Star Wars blah blah blah). Just not my bag.

I’m playing Marco Polo online and it seems solid - I hope to get a ‘real life’ play soon. I also like the look of Isle of Skye and Food Chain Magnate, but for now this is my top 5:

1. The Bloody Inn: This has a chance to rival last year’s number one pick, Deus. It’s a clever little card game where cards can do multiple things and you nebver have quite enough turns. I managed to miss it at Essen and it’s genuinely annoying me.
2. Codenames: Simply a great take on word games from Vlaada Chvátil. Listed as 2-8 players, I’d say 4-10 is right: get into teams and burn your brains with this clever word association game. Great for parties - but only if it’s not really a ‘party’.
3. Celestia: A game that is simply more fun than it has any right to be - while being the best looking game of the year in terms of art and components. It’s a push-your-luck game where you bet on another player succeeding; which keeps you engaged.
4. Lignum: A medium-heavy, super brown euro that’s dry as a witch’s tit - with added brain-straining planning and an economy where everything can seem to be worth ‘one’. But what can I say? I really enjoy the challenge, despite its small faults.
5. Shakespeare: A really solid euro game that would be higher on the list if it had an original bone in its body. My winner of the ‘rearranging the designer toolbox’ award for 2015, it’s the kind of game I love to play but have loads of similar things already.

Honourable mentions go to Lembitu (fun if naive co-op), Treasure Hunter (basic drafting done right) and Elysium (another really good euro), while I’m yet to play my copies of New York 1901, My Village and Mombasa - any of which may crack this list.

A few other titles need mentioning. The new edition of Through the Ages seems like a solid upgrade from my one play; while The King is Dead is a beautiful reimplementation of King of Siam (two plays so far). I’ve also really enjoyed my plays of expansions Concordia: Salsa, Keyflower: Merchants and Heck Meck: Extrawurm - all of which I will be reviewing early in 2016.

SEE ALSO: Previous entries for 2012, 2013 and 2014.

Sarkophag* is a very light trick-taking card game with a neat twist. If you’re familiar with the game Little Devils, Sarkophag is almost identical - please refer to ‘Key observations’ below for the slight differences.

In the double-deck sized card box you’ll find 60 cards and a rulebook. The game is currently only available in German, but the English rules are available to download in a format that fits easily into the box.

While the game box suggests this is a three to six player game, it really doesn’t work with three (as explained below). But with four to six players it offers a 15-minute game experience that sets up and packs down in no time - and with a price tag around £10.

In terms of production, Amigo provides its usual high quality linen finish card stock. The artwork is pleasingly cartoony (I particularly like the fat little cat mummy) and all the information you need is easy to make out on the cards. The game is language independent, so once you’ve printed off the rules you don’t have to worry about the cards.

Teaching

Sarkophag turns trick-taking (think Whist, Hearts etc) on its head: essentially you don’t want to win any tricks, ever. It also simplifies the concept, so once you’ve gone through a trick everyone should have the hang of it.

That said, it can feel a little counter-intuitive and you will probably get a few tricks that cause confusion. But it is very simple to describe the situation on the table without anyone having to give away what they have in their hands.

Players are dealt 10 cards each and there will be 10 hands - so you’ll have to play the lot. Each card has a number (1-60) and an amount of mummy heads (0-5) - that’s right, no suits. The idea is to have the least mummy heads in tricks you’ve won by the end of the game; hence, if you’ve won no tricks you’re in good shape!

If leading a trick the one rule is you can’t lay a card with five mummy heads on it unless you have to; because the person leading the trick can’t win it. The next person clockwise then lays a card - if it’s higher than the first, everyone has to also lay a card higher than the first one, and vice versa. If you can’t you can lay anything as prescribed, you can lay the opposite - but now the hand’s rules also flip opposite in terms of who’ll win it, making you even more likely to lose. The loser of a trick starts the next one.

The four sides

These are me, plus three fictitious players drawn from observing my friends and their respective quirks and play styles.

• The writer: It’s good to see Sarkophag has become the 15-minute game Little Devils promised to be. But it is still massively dependent on luck, as a bum deal means you can be out of it before you begin. The question you need to ask yourself is - do you care? The game is cute to look at, only needs a card shuffle, and can be taught in five minutes. It can last as long as you like as additional plays only mean an extra 15 minutes, while no one I’ve played it with has particularly taken against it. It’s a simple, clever and elegant design that’s worthy of praise.
• The thinker: While this will never be a deep game, there can be some strategy here. You may decide to win a trick, especially if you can win a low scoring round with a low scoring card - letting you then lead with one of your higher cards. But unless you’re playing with six players you no longer have the perfect knowledge you had with Little Devils, making it more of a crap-shoot. This is a good leveller for a family game, but not for a serious card-counter or strategist. People who enjoy a memory element to their filler games should seek out the original.
• The trasher: Sarkophag works well and I like the fact you’re trying to make others win tricks - but it’s simply too luck based. Sure, it’s funny when you see someone take a massive load of mummy heads in one turn; but it’s very rare you feel you did it to them deliberately - the sucker just got unlucky with the draw. I wish the game had a little more depth so you could really ram home the comic nastiness the game thrives on. I want to know what you have and to be able to try and make you pay for it! But even so, I’d be a liar if I didn’t say I had fun playing the game as-is.
• The dabbler: For me, this is a fun family game that anyone can play. It’s good to see Little Devils without the devils, as that did put some people off - but that said it still isn’t for everyone. The simple fact is that not everyone enjoys trick-taking games - many grew sick of it having played too many of these kinds of games with the family growing up. Those people aren’t going to be won over here, as if anything Sarkophag is even simpler than the old classics - so to them, probably even more ‘meh’. It’s a fresh take on the idea, but only if you like the idea already!

Key observations

This is definitely a light family game, or at best a very light con or filler game. These are not bad things, but I don’t want anyone to get the idea Sarkophag is more than that.

If you own Little Devils, there is little reason for you to invest. The main difference, beyond the retheme, is the addition of 6 cards to make it a 60 card deck. Each player has 10 cards instead of nine, and you simply deal without removing any cards depending on player count (so it’s faster, but less predictable).

As with Little Devils, Sarkophag is NOT a three-player game. Player one leads, player two decides the direction of the numbers, player three has to play a card: there’s no anticipation or dread, just a dreary and prescriptive experience where the person in third almost always ends up stuck with the trick.

So the question is - should I play this over Hearts, Spades, Whist etc? For many the answer will be no. But for an introduction to the trick-taking genre for anyone from eight and up it totally works, while the tiny rules overhead also makes it one of the quickest draws in town if you have a few gaming minutes to spare.

But £10? This is hard to justify for 60 cards in a box, which is simplifying classic games you can play with a standard card deck. But that’s your call.

Conclusion

I’ll be keeping my copy of Sarkophag - and if I’d had a copy of Little Devils it would be replacing it.

I think the changes made in this edition are all improvements, as they play to the games core strengths of speed and accessibility.

It may not win over many ‘proper’ gamers, but for me it offers as much fun as any game of this size and length has any right to - a great addition to my arsenal of gateway games. Cost will be an issue for some, but for me I think it offers enough replay value to be worth a punt if you think it’s in your wheelhouse.

* I would like to thank Amigo Spiele for providing a copy of the game for review.

Impossible mission: Gee contemplates imminent disaster in a gravity defying Hamsterrolle.

Twice each year 100 members of London on Board (the world’s largest board game group) head down to York House Hotel on Eastbourne’s seafront for a weekend of drinking games.

This time I managed two full days of gaming, the highlights of which you’ll find below (games not discussed will be reviewed soon).

Thanks to everyone who taught be games, suffered through my rules explanations, or who just sat down for a pint and a chat - it was great to see you all!

Friday: Burying bodies & winning the war

Having stayed in Eastbourne the night before (thanks Lauren!) I was able to get my game on very early. I also took very few breaks, which is rare for me. I just seemed to wander from game to game organically until it was suddenly 2.30 in the morning…

• Quartermaster General (x2): This WW2 themed six-player game was probably the most played game last Eastbourne, but I missed it every time. Luckily, shortly after I arrived this time it was suggested and we had back-to-back plays. It’s a light logistical game with snappy turns, so the high player count isn’t a problem. It’s also a team game (3 vs 3) so you always feel involved; while each deck of cards plays very differently. I was the UK and luckily the allies won both our games, but importantly they both played out very differently. A game I’d like to play more.
• Warhammer Quest: The Adventure Card Game: This really isn’t my sort of thing, but I was in good company so gave it a go. It was actually surprisingly good fun for a boy’s own fantasy co-op dungeon delve, but I wouldn’t care if I never played again. It has all the dice and sheen and mini cards you’d expect from a Fantasy Flight game, but was more fun than Imperial Assault et al. You have just as many decisions to make without the minis and map that make that game feel like work.
• Andromeda: Comfortably my worst game of the weekend, but even this wasn’t that bad - just boring, really. Oddly it screamed ‘Kickstarter!” without being one: generic sci-fi art, gaudy plastic minis and a complete lack of anything even verging on originality. Move dudes, try to control areas, get points. The theme couldn’t have been more thinly painted on. A complete waste of time and cardboard.
• Race for the Galaxy - Xeno Invasion (x3): As a big fan of Race, and having played all the expansions, I approached this with the customary scepticism - and was sadly proven right. Xeno Invasion, the module, forces you down the military route to win; which negates half the fun of Race. The cards are also programmed for this eventuality so if you don’t use the module you have a lot of rather pointless military cards in the deck. Not an expansion I will be purchasing, I’m afraid. That said, it’s still Race - I had a good time playing, but would rather have played any of the previous versions. Footnote: I got a win over Kester!
• The Bloody Inn: This was number three on my Essen wish list so, having failed to pick it up then, it became my number one Eastbourne target. The game is totally in my wheelhouse - cards which have multiple purposes, a tight economy and never enough actions to do everything you want to do. Add brilliant artwork and an original theme, and I was totally sold. Definitely my highlight of the weekend, this game has rocketed to the top of my wishlist. It feels like the game Bruges should’ve been, and I enjoyed Bruges a lot. And I won. Twice (we also played Saturday).
• Hamsterrolle: I’m rarely one for dexterity games, but this looks so fantastic (pictured) I had to give it a go. It’s a balancing game - nothing original there - except that you’re balancing the pieces inside a wheel. A genius idea, really well executed and with fantastic components. Highly recommended if you like that sort of thing.

Also played: Codenames (x2), Die Portale von Molthar, Sarkophag & 3 sind eine zu viel!

Saturday: Indiana jonesing & being the bard

Not for the hard of thinking: Ann and Rachel were our spymasters in game two of Codenames.

With Friday’s excesses adding to Thursday’s hangover, Saturday was never going to hit the same heights in terms of plays - but it was still a good day’s gaming.

I had a massive late breakfast, took a big afternoon break for the football and was in bed not too long after midnight, but there were some notable gaming highlights in between the laziness.

• Shakespeare: This was my number two Essen 2015 target, and another I’d missed, so it was great to also tick it off the list here. I really enjoyed my play and again it was right up my street: worker placement this time, but again with a tight economy and with that feeling you could never do all that you wanted to. This was my second favourite game of the weekend behind Bloody Inn, but I don’t think I’ll look to buy it: it doesn’t quite do enough that’s original to really stand out. That said I hope to get more plays in future.
• Karuba: Like Andromeda this had gone beneath my radar; but unlike Andromeda had plenty of redeeming features. Each player sets their individual player board up the same way as everyone else - with three adventurers and three temples around the edge in identical spots. These are in three colours, so you need to get each meeple to its corresponding temple while picking up goodies along the way - the trick being you will each be placing identical tiles each turn (which have roads and occasionally jewels to grab). Two of us started placing almost identically, but once we started to deviate it was a fun, fast and light game. Not a keeper for me though.

Also played: The Dwarves, Celestia, Antarctica, Lignum & 3 sind eine zu viel! (again)

The aftermath: What I missed out on

Talking of my Essen 2015 wishlist, both numbers four and five were also in attendance at Eastbourne and saw a bit of table time - just not with me! Meaning ‘Inhabit the Earth’ and ‘Isle of Skye’ now move to the top of my ‘must play’ list.

I didn’t see copies of either ‘Steam Works’ or ‘CVlizations’ though, both of which I also still want to play.

It was hard not being there with Zoe, but my first Eastbourne without her was always going to be difficult. But on the plus side it reminded how many lovely people are part of the London on Board group and that I really need to make a resolution to get to more normal London events in 2016.

To end on a slightly sour note, someone managed to knock a drink over my copy of Antarctica - which resulted in one set of the cards being damaged enough to very much wipe out any real resale value. While the offender apologised profusely they didn’t once offer me any kind of compensation, which left a bad taste in my mouth. I’m not sure what I would’ve said if they had, but not to offer seems pretty mean spirited.

If it had been me, I would’ve offered to take the damaged copy and buy them a new one. I’d have thought the least they could do would be to offer me something - a pint if nothing more. Any thoughts?