I’ve just gotten Earth a few weeks ago and played it a few times already. For me it completely replaces Wingspan for anything but a really casual / short play. By removing all the elements of Wingspan that forced sequential turns (Birdhouse and Market) they lost nothing of value and managed to build a game where you can do a ludicrous amount of actions each game and have practically no downtime. Then they added a ton more scoring opportunities, some light asymmetry and a lot more variability, all for barely any additional complexity.
Oh, I tried this for a few games on boardgamearena. I quite liked it, but the cards you draw seemed very influential in whether they fit the fauna cards/personal objectives or not. Do you find it holds up when playing it repeatedly?
I mean yeah. But it’s really no worse than the card based scoring goals in Wingspan. There are a certain percentage of cards that will fit and the rest will not. There’s a certain amount of “digging” for those cards. But the nice part is that as part of that digging you may very well draw a better alternative where as in Wingspan you had to deliberately play to draw more scoring cards.
I feel that having so much more scoring options in play puts less emphasis on trying to make any particular one happen. You’re likely going to find something that fits just by chance. There are also goals that give you points off ANY player’s tableau. So if you draw a scoring that wants lots of rocky terrain cards and you don’t have much but your opponent happened to assemble a ton of them: easy, points for you.
I’ve just gotten Earth a few weeks ago and played it a few times already. For me it completely replaces Wingspan for anything but a really casual / short play. By removing all the elements of Wingspan that forced sequential turns (Birdhouse and Market) they lost nothing of value and managed to build a game where you can do a ludicrous amount of actions each game and have practically no downtime. Then they added a ton more scoring opportunities, some light asymmetry and a lot more variability, all for barely any additional complexity.
Oh, I tried this for a few games on boardgamearena. I quite liked it, but the cards you draw seemed very influential in whether they fit the fauna cards/personal objectives or not. Do you find it holds up when playing it repeatedly?
I mean yeah. But it’s really no worse than the card based scoring goals in Wingspan. There are a certain percentage of cards that will fit and the rest will not. There’s a certain amount of “digging” for those cards. But the nice part is that as part of that digging you may very well draw a better alternative where as in Wingspan you had to deliberately play to draw more scoring cards.
I feel that having so much more scoring options in play puts less emphasis on trying to make any particular one happen. You’re likely going to find something that fits just by chance. There are also goals that give you points off ANY player’s tableau. So if you draw a scoring that wants lots of rocky terrain cards and you don’t have much but your opponent happened to assemble a ton of them: easy, points for you.