Does Stone Age on the iOS have room for this many cavemen?

“Worker placement game” sounds so dull. “Worker” is, at best, a generic word. It’s also from a word that means the opposite of fun. It’s a word about Mondays. “Placement” isn’t doing the phrase any favors. Placement is one of the least active things you can do, hardly a notch above loitering. It’s what you do when you set the table before a dinner. Placement. “Worker placement” is basically job assigning. Depositing labor. Task designation. Clerk putting. Office management, really. Even “human resources” sounds better, because if you screw up your perception just so, you can imagine it’s about using people to make soylent green. “Worker placement” is as prosaic a phrase as “peon management”, and like peon management, you’d never know it can be the cornerstone of often awesome gameplay.

So I suggest we call games like Stone Age — now ported to the iOS — not “worker placement” games, but “I steal from you the thing I know you wanted to do and now you have to react or pretend you didn’t want to do it” games. Or — you know you’re thinking it — “cockblock” games.

After the jump, I promise I’ll clean up the language

What makes worker placement good is the jostling with other players. You want to do both A and B, but which one do you pick first, for fear the next player also wants to do A or B? Tension. Indirect conflict. Scrambling over limited resources. Give four men three scraps of food and drama happens.

It’s a fantastic dynamic, especially when it’s the complement to more direct conflict. Such as the city building in the cowboy-themed Carson City or the Ice Age survival-of-the-fittest wargame in Dominant Species. In those games, the worker placement is the parlor you go through to get to the the main room.

Stone Age is a more modest design, along the lines of Caylus for how you’re just gathering resources and cashing them in for victory points. It’s pretty much all parlor. Which is fine. Not everyone wants to build Carson City or shepherd spiders to global dominance over birds and reptiles. Stone Age is fast, light, and uniquely appealing.

The appeal of Stone Age is two-fold. First is that it’s a very casual friendly game. There isn’t a Settlers of Catan neophyte who wouldn’t transitional effortlessly to Stone Age. This is not a demanding game. It’s not going to drop anyone into an economic death spiral. It’s friendly and mostly forgiving. And part of the reason is the dice.

The dice are the second element of Stone Age’s appeal and, as far as I can tell, what makes it unique among cockblocking games (sorry, that’s the last time I’ll say that). Most worker placement games are razor’s edge resource management challenges. But Stone Age throws over the harsh mistress of scarce resource management in favor of lady luck. Any time you gather resources, you roll dice. There are even cards that involve rolling dice to see what prize you get. For all its Euro-lite-ness, Stone Age is not afraid of randomness. And in case you hate dice, a great mechanism lets you partly subvert the dice by developing tools. It’s some lovely theming meets game mechanics.

On the iPad, Stone Age is a bit of a disappointment, but not for the usual reasons. This is a port with solid AI, or at least enough randomness that I don’t feel cheap beating up on the AI. It has excellent multiplayer support, either for games with friends or games with strangers. But it’s primarily an iPhone game, designed to accommodate that system’s smaller screen. Important information about who has what — and therefore who’s likely to do what, and what you should do to block them — is one tap too deep. The clarity you’d get with an iPad is sacrificed to the iPhone’s smaller screen and a slavish attachment to the boardgame’s rough artwork.

But all’s well that ends well. This is one of a few boardgames that I’ve bought for the tabletop after being introduced to it on the iPad. And unlike the other two (Dominant Species and Small World), this is a game still worth having on the iOS.

4 stars
iOS

  • Tim James

    Yay more iOS boardgame reviews. I think I’ll hold out on this one though. I’m trying to stick with deep classics that have good iPad implementation. So far I’m batting 1.000.

  • Nightgaunt

    Why do I dislike this game? (N.B.: I’ve only played the real boardgame.) I love worker placement/cockblock games! I love the theme. I love the placing guys and rolling dice for resources part. What totally saps my enthusiasm is the stuff I do with those resources, which is… uh… what, exactly? Am I building huts to get points? Why do these huts require totally different materials to make? Why are they stacked like that? And I guess those other things I buy are technologies or something? On the bottom bit of the board, basically, the theme completely collapses for me. I swear, usually great game dynamics trump theme for me–and the mechanics basically seem to work fine in Stone Age–but this game so thoroughly fumbles the ball thematically, I just lose almost all interest in playing it.

    Pillars of the Earth is the quintessential worker placement game, if you ask me. When’s the iOS version of THAT coming?

  • Mercanis

    To make sure I understand the term: is Rebuild a worker placement game?

    Correction:
    “the worker placement is [the] parlor you go through to get to the the main room”

  • tomchick

    No, no, not at all. A worker placement game — I think Caylus pioneered this, but someone can correct me if I’m wrong — is where players take turns claiming spots with a marker. Then, during an execution phase, each player takes actions corresponding to the spots he claimed. This is usually gathering resources, earning victory points, or somehow interacting with the main gameplay mechanics.

    I guess I forget how foreign this must be to people who haven’t played these kinds of games.

  • tomchick

    I don’t know Pillars of the Earth, but you like it better than Dominant Species? I can’t imagine there’s a better worker placement game than that.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Janster01 Jan Bjørnebo

    you can play this for free on yucata.de but only as asynch MP.

  • Nightgaunt

    Haven’t played Dominant Species yet! I’ve been scared off by the long playtime. I rarely get to play a game that takes 2 hours, much less three or four (and I’m pretty much always playing with some new players, so we always take more than the designated time).

    Get thee some Pillars of the Earth! I guess it’s been longer than I realized since it came out (2006, a year after Caylus), so I don’t know how easy it is to find. It won plenty of awards–hopefully that means it’s still in print.

    I have owned Carson City for over a year and haven’t managed to get a chance to play it yet. Lucky for me, the theme of this week’s boardgame gathering is “Games no one has played yet”! (What, you don’t do themes for your boardgaming events?)

  • Nightgaunt

    Hmmm… I dunno, Tom. Granted, in most worker placement games the workers are all or mostly identical. But in Rebuild you’re basically deciding where to assign your little people, right? I guess it would be misleading to give the impression that Rebuild is a typical WP game, but I kinda think it’s a reasonable classification.

  • BLAM!

    The word you’re looking for is “Euro”. A Euro game is one of super abstracted mechanics and detached theme worker placement (snooty boardgame players will refer to concrete themes centered around conflict as “Ameritrash”).

    For my money, the best of both worlds is a little boardgame called Chaos in the Old World. Each player represents one of the chaos gods from Warhammer fantasy as they bicker with each other trying to ruin the world. The god of disease wants to occupy and infect populated regions. The god of ecstasy wants to corrupt nobles. The blood god wants to MURDER. Fun fairly simple time.

  • tomchick

    Dude, there is no way anyone would describe Rebuild as “worker placement” game. The terms refers to a very particular type of gameplay: Caylus, Carson City, Chaos in the Old World, Dominant Species, Agricola, and so forth. Rebuild definitely doesn’t quality unless you’re trying to redefine the term. :)

  • tomchick

    I love the asymmetry in Chaos in the Old World. Do folks call that a worker placement game? I guess it seem more like a traditional wargame to me.

  • tomchick

    I’ll look into Pillars, but I’m a bit reluctant to go back to earlier designs given how the concept has been fleshed out with later games. It’s like how I have zero desire to play Dominions. It might be the original deck building game, but I feel there have been so many better variations on the theme since then that it doesn’t hold up for me.

    Let me know what you think of Carson City. That’s always been a popular one with my friends.

  • BLAM!

    It’s kind of half and half, but I always just call it worker placement to entice biased Euro game snobs into giving it a shot. Before they know it, they’re gleefully playing Rain of Pus cards and forgetting all about the “Ameritrash” combat components.

    If you haven’t played with the expansion yet, do so. It’s a much better game with it (upgrades worth picking besides cultist, etc.).

  • Broooski

    “snooty boardgame players will refer to concrete themes centered around conflict as ‘Ameritrash’”

    Actually, I thought Ameritrash was anything that was just overproduced to compensate for weak mechanics. Lots of pieces and plastic but little gameplay.

  • MikeO

    I think you are both right. Ameritrash, as I view it, is a strong theme, conflict, lots of plastic, and crappy games. But perhaps I am just jaded and cynical.

    (plenty of crap Euro games, too, I am nothing if not unbiased)

  • Nightgaunt

    Sure, I’m plenty aware of these categories, but I don’t assume everyone else is. Another way to say what I said above is: I’m generally a pretty Euro-friendly player, but half of Stone Age (resource gathering, farming, breeding) nods towards more evocative theming and then the rest of it (huts and cards) feels like the worst of “here’s some abstract mechanics with some art slapped on” Euro-style, and it’s so jarring I find the experience unpleasant.

  • Nightgaunt

    I have to say, Tom: One of us defined the genre by talking (admittedly in a cursory way) about the actual gameplay mechanics and one did so by naming a bunch of titles. Which approach is going to help us figure out if Rebuild is a worker placement game or not? I’ll stick with my definition: I’ve got dudes. I’ve got a board with jobs those dudes can do, and more jobs than I have dudes. I have to choose where to assign my dudes to do the jobs I need done. Does that not describe Caylus, Agricola, and Rebuild?

  • Nightgaunt

    (Er, okay, sorry, you totally did what I said you didn’t do up there in your first comment and I must have skimmed through it. The difference between our definitions is that yours seems to rely on multiple players taking turns to claim spaces (and presumably fighting over those spaces). This doesn’t feel essential to worker placement to me; all I think you really need is scarcity. Again, more jobs to do than you have dudes.)

  • tomchick

    If you want to use the term “worker placement” 100% literally, then you can absolutely apply it to games like Rebuild, most city builders, Starcraft, Dungeon Keeper, and any wargame with an engineer unit, all of which involve placing dudes who do work.

    But if you want to use “worker placement” to talk to boardgamers about a specific genre, you’re going to have to let go of the literal meaning of the individual words, Nightgaunt. It’s an established gameplay mechanic with a specific name that refers to very specific games.

  • tomchick

    No one is falling for your baiting, Geryk!

  • Nightgaunt

    Pillars is not at all a primitive or rough WP design. Not sure how it compares with Dominant Species, but it’s a better design than Carson City (which I played last night), in my opinion. However, keep in mind that I think Dominion is still easily the best deck-building game–most of its successors have added theme and cruft and not much more. Dominion is clean, classic, flexible, truly brilliant. But I look at games through a designer’s lens more than a consumer’s.

    So, Carson City! Lots of neat stuff in there. It’s clearly a branch off the Caylus tree. The ability to duel over contentious spaces is a nice innovation and obviously fits the theme. Overall, it’s a very nice meld of mechanics and theme, which I always value. My issue with the game, I think, is that all the stuff going on on the map is just TOO open, too many options for me to consider. Keep in mind, this was our first play; there’s a lot you can’t understand until the end of your first game–I’m okay with that in general. But even in future plays it seems to me that the pool is going to feel a little too broad and too deep. Also probably slightly too many spaces on the “road” to choose from. Finally, there were too many cases where I felt like I could find the optimal move if I made all the other players wait for five minutes while I did a bunch of arithmetic. (If I place this guy for wages, will that let me buy one more victory point after I spend and earn all the rest of my money this round? How much would I benefit from getting VPs for $4 instead of $5 this turn?)

    There was a great moment in our game when the player who we could all tell was about to leap into the lead hung on until everyone else had passed in cowboy placement and snagged a church that he dropped into the perfect place to cancel out several attacks on his buildings.

    Pillars is plenty deep, but more manageable, in my opinion. You should try to get it in front of your friends who like Carson City.