A bad roll, coupled with a mistake, will still lose you this game. But at the same time, we learned the value of the Bow & Arrow's 90% chance to hit.
Conclusion
The powerful equipment is now firmly out of the early game.
It does not make sense to buy the expensive equipment when you already have a weapon, unless what you currently have is a spear and you're buying an Atlatl.
The above hunting odds adjustments, and Bow/Atlatl costs raised to 4, and fixed the starting equipment at 4, regardless of how many players.
Notes
Dan went sling + spear, missed a lot with sling, but with terrible rolls. I went Atlatl with no spears, gathered, sold, bought a spear and got killed.
Dan eventually had success with his sling, and I came back with a spear, eventually buying another Atlatl after some successful gathering.
Conclusion
We agree that being able to start out with an Atlatl or Bow without any ammunition feels like you're trying to game the system rather than playing within the theme.
Next Steps
Next test will price those equipment higher so that you can't start with them.
No questions or concerns regarding rules. The flow of play is fast, just as intended, with really short turns. They liked the game, said it was lots of fun. They really liked the theme. They liked the marketplace supply/demand track. They wanted to keep playing when it ended.
Opportunities
The game should be longer, I've heard this before. Easily solved by adding more plant and animal disks. I've done the math earlier and it stays balanced when I go from 24 to 36. Until now it's been playtested during lunch, so a 45 minute play time was key. Now it could go up to an hour or a bit more, more than that and it's playing longer it should. It's not a stuffy 90 minute euro game, or a drawn out 4 hour ameritrash dice feet, it's a tightened modern blend of the positive aspects of those two types of games. (See my Euro/American Hybrid article.)
The equipment isn't differentiated enough, and maybe not powerful enough. You can spend a lot of points on an Atlatl and then die from a mediocre roll. I've done the math and I know that with the bell curve one point makes a big difference, but perception matters, and I think the better equipment could be more effective, and more expensive. More on that in the conclusion.
The goals could be a bigger part of the game. They could be harder, take more effort than luck, and make up a larger portion of the final score. If I do this, I'll have to do something about the suicide strategy, one I've known about for a while, but was executed to perfection by blind playtester Erin Snyder. Maybe when a character dies you only get points for equipment or another goal, not both.
Conclusion
Looked at as a whole, I think the underlying issue in the feedback I got from this video review of Hunt or Gather has to do with narrative arc.
The game has good tension as you're trying to time the market, and that builds at the end of the game. But the end does sneak up quickly, and the characters lack that growth that you find in most American games. In general you can buy whatever you want at the beginning, so there isn't the ramping up in power. And it is often possible to see who is going to win before the secret goal scoring. By expanding the secret goals, pricing the best equipment above the starting points, and lengthening the game, I think I can increase the sense of rising action, and keep the tension going through to the resolution.
This summer I was lucky enough to go on Baltic Cruise. One day in St. Petersburg we visited a board game shop and met a group of people running the store, and playing Arkham Horror. Our guide mentioned that I designed games, and they were very excited. We arranged to come back the next morning and play.
I taught them the game with a little help from our translator. They were able to read the secret goals, and the game was able to overcome the small verbal language barrier. I wish we had had time to finish the game, but they got in a shipment and we had to go. I left the game with them, and hope they have played it.
Taught a couple new players. No matter how many times I do it, always an informative process.
They liked the game, we played twice in a row.
Now that the combat system has been drastically simplified, the remaining rough edges are more apparent.
Changes to Consider
Explaining attacking would be easier if the number of attacks wasn't limited to 2, if you could just attack until either you missed, or the animal was dead. But I'm afraid the Sling will become over-powered.
Now that hunting is simpler, I think there's room for some more complexity on the gathering side. One idea would be that you can turn in one resource for no points (a free sample), in order to boost the demand for that resource up to the top value spot.
It's only one play with 3 players, but I think it worked well. The bow will certainly see a lot more use because at 2 points, plus 1 for an arrow, you can equip it after you die and are starting out with a new hunter.
The weapon still has limitations. It doesn't do much damage, you have to hit any of the current deadly animals twice to kill them, giving you a high chance of dying. It burns through ammunition quickly, so you have to keep buying more arrows.
The new equipment art looks great! It really ties in with the board, and will help people learn the game by acting as labels for the score tracks.
Played with a new mix of four players, including one new player, and two who haven't played in a while. Gave an abbreviated rules teach which highlighted some graphic design updates that are needed. Also drove home for me the importance of receiving acknowledgement that players understand the end game scoring, which is simple, but vital!
Graphic Design
After seeing the dice graphics in print, it's clear that they need to be higher contrast.
As Christopher Badell (from Greater Than Games) pointed out, I need a stronger visual indication of what is Hunter equipment, and what belongs to Gatherer.
I also need to convey graphically which weapons require ammunition. The bow is obvious, but the Atlatl is less known, and unique in that spears can be used by themselves.
Bow & Arrow
Statistically the bow is a powerful weapon, it does medium damage, able to kill anything with two shots, and is one of the most accurate weapons. Logistically it is weaker, players favor the spear because the investment is less than what you get when you re-spawn after dying. So I could raise the cost of the spear, but I don't like that because it reduces player starting options. Instead I'll try lowering the cost of the bow.
