THE SEASONAL SALE IS NOW ON! 25% OFF EVERYTHING WITH A CODE SEASONSNG25

Train of Thought: Touring Snowdonia – Arcs is a Snowdonia clone (part 2)


Train of Thought: Touring Snowdonia – <em>Arcs</em> is a <em>Snowdonia</em> clone (part 2)


Last time, we talked about Snowdonia's nature as a deeply tactical game, and how it shares that trait with recent hit game
Arcs. We dug further into how to better embrace their shared tactical core. We also firmly countered the under-informed allegations by first time players that these games are "too chaotic". Today we’ll examine more of the similar systems in these games, how interactivity drives them and how you can take advantage of that. As a quick clarifier, the below is written primarily with the base games for both titles in mind and not their respective scenario/campaign modes.

Where do we start?

Interactivity. Both of these games fly strongly in the face of other games in their genre because players’ games intersect with each other immediately and often. Almost all worker placement games carry some interactivity when competing for worker spots, but Snowdonia players also face tight competition over limited resources, rubble, station/track/excavation spaces and contracts as well. And while space operas are a more typically interactive genre, they still usually start with a period of time in which players are far away from each other building their own separate areas up first.

Snowdonia and Arcs often see players disrupting or obstructing each other immediately. Some will perceive this interactivity as mean and unfair, for others it will give the game an exciting vitality. Either way though, you’re going to rub up against your opponents and will benefit massively from paying attention to what they’re doing and thinking about what they’re likely to do next. Don’t simply wait for your turn, watch your opponent’s turns, ask yourself why they’ve made that choice!

Anything I can use to help me figure out the answer to that?

Yes! Many things. For starters, their resources. Both games have them and both games allow you to infer a decent amount about an opponent’s capabilities or what they might do next. For example in Arcs, each resource is spent to perform a particular action. Ordinarily players are constrained to perform only the actions on the card they’ve played, but with these resources they can combine multiple types into one turn and achieve far more effective and explosive manoeuvres. If you’re not paying attention, these will blindside you and feel like they came "out of nowhere". If you can see somebody with many resources, know that they’re well positioned to score a lot of points and expect them to try to do so imminently.

This is true of Snowdonia as well. If a player has just turned 9 iron ore into 3 steel bars or has a big pile of stone, expect to see track and building spots being claimed in the near future. If you can see it coming, you could disrupt their play by claiming one first!

While on the topic of resources, it’s also worth noting that both games have limited supplies and thus you often need to be an opportunist to win. If there is only 1 coal in the stock yard, consider grabbing it even if you have no immediate use for it. There’s no guarantee of when more will be available. In both games, whenever a resource is hard to get, it’s usually because everybody wants it. Try and spot that demand in advance of it running out!

Gotcha, what else should I be paying attention to?

Cards. Let’s look at Contract cards and Guild cards. In both games, these cards consist of a scoring element at the top and a gameplay effect benefit on the bottom. They’re all public, are taken from a communal, contested row and sit face up in front of their owners once claimed.

Neither of these games just hand these cards out to players randomly. In the majority of cases, a player will have them because they specifically chose them and invested actions to get them. This means they are giving away information about what they hope to do next. 

In Snowdonia, if a player has a card needing 4 rail to score, they will be spending approximately 4 actions worth of turns collecting iron ore, 2 turns converting it into steel and 2 to 4 turns laying it as track. That’s potentially 10 actions they have signalled to you they intend to take (depending on how much of this work is already done). Equally, you can expect a player with a card doubling their excavation rate to be aiming for a lot of rubble next time the weather is good (and then probably looking to pick some rubble contracts after that!).

Likewise in Arcs, if a player has, say, the Fuel Cartel (which temporarily captures the entire game’s supply of fuel), it immediately puts them in a strong position to declare the Tycoon ambition (which scores points for having the most fuel and materials). If you can predict the declaration of Tycoon in advance, you’ll be ahead of the other players on catching up/competing for that goal. Or indeed, you can pursue a different goal with a better idea of your opponent’s likelihood to disrupt you.

Goodness, all this talk of plans and predictions and possibilities of disruption. If my opponents figure out my plan, how can I try to stop them from scuppering it?

The first player marker. The way it’s claimed in both games functions quite differently but its potential power is massive in both. Without it, you cannot be certain any plan will go ahead. With it, you’ll be calling the shots.

That said, grabbing the marker in either game can often involve paying a meaningful cost. If you’re going to discard a card to seize the initiative in Arcs or place a worker that won’t get you many/any resources in Snowdonia to take it… be sure you have a clear plan for how you’re going to use it! (I would say this particular piece of advice goes double for Arcs).

Makes sense, thanks for the tips. Is Arcs going to become a regular feature?

No it is not. This series is called 'Train of Thought' after all, not 'Spaceship of Speculation'. These games are very different in many other important ways. I wanted to talk about it though because it’s a great modern example of some similar principles being met by its sceptics with some similar complaints. I believe Snowdonia serves as an excellent teacher for many concepts and skills in gaming. I used a less immediately obvious example as a way to demonstrate that.

What do you think though? Do you think I’m mad for seeing so many parallels here? Are there any other unexpected games you’ve felt an essence of Snowdonia in when you played them?

If you’d like to receive all the latest Snowdonia: Grand Tour news before anyone else, sign up to the mailing list here.

If you’re interested in playtesting Grand Tour and are able to make “print and plays”, you can sign up to our playtest mailing list here.

Jaya Baldwin


Leave a comment