From: "David L. Richtmyer" <dlrichtm@UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: TimJim games

On Wed, 23 Aug 1995, Alan Poulter wrote:

>>David Richtmyer (obviously a member of the Cabal :) writes:-
>>On a related point I highly recommend TimJim's _Age of
>>Exploration_ as a state of the art version of Conquistador; RHB
>>himself gave it high accolades in a recent issue of BROG.
>
>What differences are there between Conquistador and Age of
>Exploration? Have TimJim produced any other multi-player games
of >note?

Basically, AoE uses a card (actually, several different sets) of
cards to drive the game system instead of the planning
sheet/roll-the-die-and-check-the-table system found in most games
of the 70s and 80s.  The map, which is mounted, contains boxes
that cover the routes around the world.  You can choose between
several types of ships (small cargo fast ones vs. larger, slower
ones) and different types of goodies to take on board (extra
sailors [handy when your crew goes down to scurvy], copper hulls
[handy to prevent the Toredo worms from making Swiss cheese of
your hull], soldiers, cannons, gifts for the natives, etc.). 
When outfitted (also a function of a deck of cards), you shove
off and, as RHB puts it, say goodbye to Marlon Brando.  From
about that point on you are at the mercy of the elements (the Sea
Deck), or the locals when you finally touch New World land (the
Land Deck).  You can choose to explore, and likely get lost in
the Amazon, or attack the locals in a series of battles that are
much more evocative than Conquistador.  You can choose to try and
circumnavigate the globe; but as I can tell you, running out of
provisions in the Pacific with the closest land many miles away
can sure ruin a day.  The game plays exceptionally quickly (much
quicker than Conquistador), and is quite interactive due to the
card play.  Many guffaws are to be heard from your opponents as
you attempt to triage your greed with some common sense.  To win
you need both and a judicious amount of luck in the bargain ... 
The events are much more detailed than in Conquistador, yet, as
I have said, game play is quite a bit quicker.  The game is great
for solitaire, and would make an excellent teaching aid in the
classroom for the incredible difficulties and chances taken by
a most remarkable group of men; men who combined incredible
greed, daring, diplomacy and adventure.  After having played both
I traded off my copy of Conquistador for a used copy of Yaquinto
Bomber.  (Speaking of which, here is a game system that could
benefit from some state of the art thinking.)

As for TimJim, I can't speak as knowledgeably; AoE is the only
one
I own.  I have heard good things about their other offerings,
which have a tendency to be non-historically based: titles
include _Fast Food Franchise_, an item on space trading that is
evidently like a stellar version of the 18xx railroad games, etc.

David

From: "David L. Richtmyer" <dlrichtm@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Thanks!

I failed to mention in my mini-review, done at work so not being able to
benefit from a greater amount of reflection, that each card, be it a
Land or Sea card, presents the player with a set of rather Hobbesian
choices; the fun element in the game is what you decide to do: be
cautious, and possibly (though even here not necessarily) survive, or
give in to the gamer's basic instincts: greed.

For instance, conquering the Aztecs is quite difficult, requiring the
right card pulls at the right time, the dice cooperating, and
non-interference from your opponents.  Next to circumnavigating the
globe it is probably the most difficult thing to do. However, if you
*do* do it; you automatically win; you don't even need to go back to
Europe to receive your accolades.  Most of the time this is a losing
proposition, but once I had all the elements in the right place: the
Aztecs folded quicker than a cheap beach chair!

David