Wildlife

I played Wildlife for the first time today with a full complement of 6 players. The premise of the game is you are in charge of an animal species and must be the most succesful animal. Each animal has a preferred set of terrain, of which there are 6. Each terrain type is rated as no action, migrate, expand, and attack. Each species starts out with two terrains as no action, two as migrate, one as expand, and one attack.

If a terrain is rated as no action, you cannot do anything in the terrain. If a terrain is rated as migrate, you can move tiles to that area. If a terrain is listed as expand, you can place new tiles to the area. Any terrains listed as attack, if the terrain is completely full, you can discard one of your opponents tiles, and place one of your tiles in its place. The ratings are heirarchical, so if you can attack into a terrain, you can also expand and migrate to the terrain as well.

Each player receives 10 cards at the beginning of the game. They are divided into 4 groups. Terrain cards have terrain types listed on them that you can use to play actions. For example, if I play a desert card, and I have desert rated as attack, I can play the card, and migrate, expand, or attack into a desert space. There are adaptation cards which allow you to increase your rating in a terrain type. No action can be increased to migrate, which can be improved to expand, and then to attack. The third type of card is a special event card, these can range from plagues which require other players to remove their tiles from the board, to food surpluses which give you additional food (which is used as money). Finally, there are wildlife enchancements which give you benefits while you hold the card. Food gives you points each turn, aggression allows you to launch a free attack each turn, intelligence allows you to play one additional card per turn, etc.

Each turn you get to play three cards, but at least one must be auctioned off to the other players. Then you increase your hand size back to ten. You also get one free migrate per turn. During the auction, one card is auctioned off, and the player who wins the auction plays the card immediately.

Points are scored in two ways. When one of the terrains on the board is filled, they receive points from what I will call the terrain track. It starts at 3, and as more terrains are filled, increases to 5. The player who fills the terrain by occupying the last space scores the points. After every 4 terrains are filled, a major scoring phase occurs. Each terrain is scored based upon monopolies (major and minor, if you are the only player in a terrain, and whether or not all the spaces are filled) and places (1st, 2nd, and 3rd). After that, the largest herd (most contiguous spaces filled), most adaptations, most enhancements, and most food are scored. After 3 major scorings are completed the game is over (12 terrains filled, if I remember correctly, or one player plays all of his tiles).

That's all there is to the game. It does allow a variety of strategies to be played, but I did have several issues with the game.

1) Card draw - Drawing cards can improve replayability, but it can severly hamper players as well. In our game, one of the players was hampered because he was drawing cards that he could not play into, and he was not drawing any adaptations. On top of that, every enhancement he had was taken away from him immediately (Once all of an enhancement type has been taken from the pool, players take them from each other, with players in the lead having their enhancements removed first. For example, I want to get intelligence, Neal and Brock each have one, Neal has 3 points, and Brock has 5, I need to take Brock's intelligence, I cannot choose to take Neal's). The other players said that there are ways to avoid this, and that it was a special case, etc. However, I have to give the game a black mark in this regard, if it happens in the first game I play, it is bound to happen again. It's not fun just playing out a game that lasts 2 hours. Also, even though you get 10 cards, if you start off with a bad hand, it is hard to turn over the poor cards in your hand since you cannot discard, and must play three cards each turn.

2) Game Length - Granted this is dependent on the card draw, the number of players, and the pace at which the players play, but we were playing at a good pace, and it still took 2-1/2 hours. There are a good number of other games that I would rather play for this length of time.

3) Play limits - While it is great that each species has a different preferred terrain, and they are randomly dealt to the players, it can provide an advantage to players that do not compete with other players. If I am the only player that can play new pieces to water, that means that other players will try to deal the water from their hands during the auction. Since no one else needs water, I can get it at a good price. Someone can play adaptations to make water useful to them, but it may be too late to be useful. In addition to lower prices, any terrains that I do not need will probably fetch a higher price due to increased demand. While this does not necessarily mean I will win the game, it can be a big advantage.

4) Tactical, not strategical - Most of the plays are due to the current set up on the board. While you can opt for longer term options, these are pretty much limited to adaptation cards. The good enhancement cards could be considered strategic options, but the fact that the more strategic of them are in great demand, it limits their effectiveness. In the late game, the use of enhancements comes down to, which one do I need for this turn? While I love tactical games, I prefer longer games to be strategic rather than tactical. It means little if I get intelligence on the first turn to let me play four cards each turn, if I need to play another enhancement to get it back each turn. Sure, I can play other enhancements, but, how do I know if the other players are going to take that back from me on their turn.

Wildlife is a solid game, no more, no less. I would play it again, but I will not request that it be brought out. I give it a solid 6. Unlike other games, I really do not see any improvement in this score. My main knocks are the length of the game and the lack of immersion for a game of its length. Die Macher can be played in a similar length of time (say 3 to 3-1/2 hours for experienced players, and I enjoyed that game far more after one play). For the same time frame, you could fit in two games of Puerto Rico, Princes of Florence, or Traders of Genoa (without micromanaging the deals), or a game of Tigris & Euphrates. That said, it is a good 6 player game, and there are not many of those, so it does have some merit when 6 players are present. With fewer players I would rather play one of the other games I named.

Overall: 6