Our mission is to bring joy to tabletops worldwide. Approximately 20% of the world speaks English, so if Stonemaier Games only published products in that language, we would miss out on serving on 80% of potential tabletops. We currently work with 40+ other publishers around the world to accomplish that goal, amounting to around 13% of our annual revenue.
Specifically, my coworker, Susannah, coordinates with those publishers (aka localization partners). For example, when the Viticulture: Bordeaux Expansion English files were approved by our manufacturer in mid-2025, Susannah shared the source files for translation and the price per unit at different quantities with our localization partners. For any who decided to participate, Susannah kept them (and me) up to date with any potential revisions found during the translation process.
Important: Every localization partner is a publisher, completely independent from Stonemaier Games. Any information about localized games is for localization partners to share when they’re ready. You’re always welcome to express interest in any Stonemaier product with our localization partner for your preferred language.
I last wrote in detail about localization in 2016. The original article is still relevant, hence why I haven’t updated it, but today I’ll outline the process we’ve refined over the years. This is not the only way to coordinate localization; it’s just what we’ve found works well for Stonemaier Games and our partners. This is roughly in chronological order:
I don’t try to make our games language independent (i.e., all icons), as I find that a complex mesh of icons almost always impedes accessibility, limits the scope of creative abilities, and decreases thematic flavor. I greatly prefer a mix of icons and text. As an unintended side effect, some amount of language dependence increases the appeal for localization partners.
Late in the development process, Susannah pitches the product to localization partners in confidentiality so they can discuss if they want to join the first printing. Sometimes they ask to see prototype files, which I provide. We typically work with the same partners for each language to build trust and communication through consistency; it’s only if a partner continually doesn’t serve us or their customers that we look for someone new.
When the English first printing is in production, we get a quote from Panda for a batch of smaller quantities (1000-4000 units) to calculate localization partner prices. Typically they amount to a roughly 70% discount on MSRP (enough for us to cover manufacturing costs and make a small profit).
To ensure that partners receive the most printer-ready versions of the product, we wait until Panda has created the digital proofs and we’ve approved them before sending the source files for translation to partners. Each localization partner handles their own translation and proofreading. They typically have 2-3 months to provide printer-ready files (PDFs created from the InDesign source files) to join the first localized print run. Sometimes translators find mistakes that we missed, typically in time for us to update the English files; Susannah communicates those revisions to all active translators and I answer rule questions.
Each partner uploads their final files to Panda’s file management system and goes through Panda’s pre-press checks. If they don’t finalize and approve the files by the deadline provided, they must wait for the next printing.
Localization partners pay us 50% before production begins; they pay us the other 50% when their products are ready to ship from Panda a few months later. Each localization partner coordinates and pays for their own freight shipping, which may include language-independent add-ons like upgraded tokens. It’s very rare that a partner doesn’t make the second payment; if that happens, we don’t release the products to them. We rarely have written contracts with localization partners.
We provide an announcement schedule and marketing materials to localization partners (including photos of the English version). If we commission a teaser trailer video, we provide a version to partners without a voiceover so they can post it in their language. Some partners tell us it’s okay to list their name on the product page for our website upon the initial announcement; others wait until later.
Again, this is just one way to do things. If you’re a newer publisher who is starting to hear from potential localization partners, I recommend looking at their portfolio of other localized games. Ask for data, talk to their customers, and do your research–their work is a reflection of you. You can also consider working with companies that publish in multiple languages (e.g., Publishing Technology Solutions).
Likewise, if a publisher contacts you to consider localization of their game, feel free to ask anything you want. Request the rules, playtest files, and any available data (e.g., crowdfunding results). Keep a close eye on any early red flags in communication.
I invite any other publishers to share their localization methods in the comments–I like hearing different perspectives. If you have any questions, please share them in the comments as well.
***
Bordeaux will be available on the Stonemaier Games webstores in English along with Wingspan Americas on Wednesday, January 21, with shipping throughout February. You can sign up for a notification here: https://stonemaiergames.com/games/viticulture/newsletter/
This game was brought to my attention by a great review on Charlie Theel’s Player Elimination website, and as usual, Charlie didn’t steer me wrong (well, there was that Fate of the Fellowship review, but there’s always an exception to the rule). City of the Great Machine is one of those rare games I like so much in which mechanics and theme are inextricably intertwined.
It’s a one-vs-many struggle set in a steampunk city dominated by a mechanical overlord – sort of George Orwell meets H. G. Wells. Players are Revolutionaries trying to inspire citizens to riot against oppression; the Great Machine has time on its side and a legion of automata to quell the dissent.
City of the Great Machine blends hidden movement, resource management, and asymmetric gameplay in a wonderfully thematic package – and it can also be played solo or co-operatively. It’s a stunning production with an excellent artwork, a well-written rulebook and comprehensive support material, and some very nice miniatures as a bonus. I enjoyed this at 2 players, but I’m very much looking forward to to playing this at a higher player count so players can scheme amongst themselves in the presence of the Great Machine (the rulebook expressly tells you to refer to players as Revolutionaries or the Great Machine, in one of many thematic touches). And, dare I say it, its theme of revolution against autocratic technology is more relevant than the glossy layer of steampunk initially leads you to believe.
There’s a wealth of strategic material in the rulebooks, but this summary distills the rules into an easily digestible few sheets. And of course, it’s available on my app, Tabletop Codex!
I just spent a delightful weekend at Geekway Mini here in St. Louis playing tabletop games–including several play-and-win games–with a variety of wonderful people. Among some new-to-me favorites, I also taught and played Origin Story, Viticulture with the new expansion board (subscribe here for more info), and an epic 7-player game of Scythe on a friend’s stunning custom board.
With many game conventions big and small happening around the world in 2026, I thought this might be a good opportunity to shine the spotlight on the amazing play-and-win system that originated with Geekway many years ago. Also, tickets for the bigger version of Geekway will be available starting this Friday–I’d love to play a game there with you in May if you decide to attend!
***
My favorite way to market our products is to facilitate and encourage them to get to the table more often. Your table, my table, the tables of reviewers, ambassadors, etc–any table will do. The more our products get to the table, the more they’re exposed to people, and hopefully the more fun people can have with them.
This is a big part of the reason why we support our products with reprints, expansions, and ongoing reviews, as well as focusing on accessibility (Watch It Played videos, ability to teach to new players on the fly instead of frontloading rules, etc). Our goal is to bring joy to tabletops worldwide, but a key element is that our games must actually get to the table.
One of my favorite ways to accomplish this goal is through play-and-win donations for game conventions and 100+ person events.
Play-and-win is a convention concept where people can check out a game, play it, and then enter their name in a lottery to win that specific game at the end of the convention. If I donate a play-and-win game to a convention, it can be experienced by dozens and dozens of people in a short amount of time. Only one of those people will win it, so if other people liked the game, they’re now informed in their decision to purchase it later.
I’ve been talking about play-and-win on this blog for a while after discovering it at St. Louis’ own Geekway to the West (which I’m attending again this year–I highly recommend it), and I’ll post those links at the bottom of this entry. Stonemaier Games sends dozens of games each month to support conventions around the world.
Today I’m going to focus on the play-and-win Google Doc that I created and maintain, as well as my current approaches to maximizing the potential of play-and-win for publishers, conventions, and gamers.
Publishers
If you’re a publisher who likes the play-and-win system, but you don’t like getting solicitations from hundreds of conventions, the Google Doc is for you. You can simply enter your information on this tab, which communicates to the participating conventions that you’re in the know and don’t need to be contacted individually.
As a publisher myself, my process for sending out play-and-win games is that I have a calendar alert late each month to remind me to check the Google Doc for conventions happening 2-3 months in the future. For example, today (mid-January) I’m looking at conventions happening in March and April. Conventions have told me that this advance notice is really helpful, particularly so the coordinators can tell vendors which games are coming in time for them to stock up via distributors.
The number of games I send to a convention depends on the size of the event. Sometimes the play-and-win coordinators enter their information on the Google Doc and forget about it, so I help to remind them of what the package is by including the words “play-and-win” as part of the address label.
I try to keep our ambassadors informed about the various conventions that feature our play-and-win games. If any of them attend those conventions, they can make sure to drop by from time to time to see if players have questions. Otherwise, you don’t need to be worried about having teachers present–people who use play-and-win are usually comfortable to learn the game from the rulebook, and random fans of the game often stop by to help out.
Last, while we donate our games to play-and-win sections for free, it’s perfectly reasonable for you to offer a convention a discount instead of a free game. This can actually be helpful to the convention, as it lets them buy exactly what they think will be the most exciting for their attendees (instead of letting you choose).
Conventions
If you’re completely new to play-and-win, read this blog entry about the core details (or these instructions on the Geekway website). Then take note of the following:
Please enter your convention on the Google Doc (use open rows at the bottom of each month or insert a new row). In doing so, you’re committing to use any contributed games for play-and-win, and you’re committing to actually having a play-and-win section with at least a dozen total games (even if it means allocating part of your convention budget towards buying games specifically for this purpose). You can now indicate if you prefer different games or multiple copies of the same game.
In filling out the Google Doc, there’s no need to contact publishers–particularly publishers on this tab–to solicit donations. You will either receive games 30-45 days before your event…or you won’t, in which case you have plenty of time to purchase games to fill your play-and-win section.
At least several weeks before the convention, tell vendors which games were donated for play-and-win so they can stock those games at the event. The play-and-win section should close (and winners announced) before the vendors close their booths.
When you receive the games, prepare them to be played (i.e., punch the punchboards, open shrinkwrapped decks of cards, sort tokens, etc). This serves the attendees hoping to show up and start playing.
It never hurts to follow up with a publisher after a convention to let them know how their games did in the play-and-win section (number of plays and ratings from participants). I understand that this is extra work, and I won’t ever hold it against a convention for not doing so, but it’s really nice when conventions do this.
I recommend only letting each person win at most 1 game for the entire event–that way you spread out the prizes among the most people. Also, instead of interrupting the event to announce the winners, simply post them at a few key places around the convention hall or on an online forum designated for attendees to check.
If you like the idea of play-and-win, feel free to check out the conventions listed on the Google Doc. You might discover a nearby game convention that you haven’t heard of.
If you’re new to game conventions, you might be pleasantly surprised by them–especially the type of convention where you just play lots of games for a few days. I’m an introvert who does not get excited about big events, but my experience at Geekway is consistently amazing. I really appreciate people who have invited me to join their game or when someone teaches a new-to-me game, and I’ve tried to be just as welcoming to others. If you attend Geekway in May and you see me, please say hi–I’d love to play a game with you!
Happy new year, everybody! I hope it will bring you much joy. I also hope it will bring you board games (which is basically the same thing). The question is, however: Which games? – Here are a few 2026 releases which look most intriguing to me. Long-time readers of this blog will notice that this year’s list is a bit longer than usual – there are just so many fascinating games scheduled for release this year!
As always, don’t take this as a shopping list (neither for you nor for me). Your taste in games and your discretion how many new games you want to chase decide what will end up in your shelf (and, hopefully, on your table)!
After that reminder, on to the games. As all of them are set in human history, they are ordered from most ancient to most recent.
Once the greatest Roman politician-generals outgrew to confines of the republican power-sharing agreement, the Republic was bound to fall. Yet it was not predestined that it would fall to Caesar. In fact, two of his associates/rivals, Pompey and Crassus, might as well have taken the diadem… if they had played their cards better.
Triumvir casts its players as the three mightiest power brokers of the last years of the Roman Republic. They will attempt to parlay their wealth, popularity, and military force into political success (in an adaptation of the negotiation mechanic from Engelstein’s and Herman’s previous cooperation Versailles 1919). Whoever settles the issues in the senate in their favor and deals best with the challenges in the rebellious provinces is poised to become the First Man in Rome…forever.
I have a fondness for the early modern period, this time when so many old certainties in Europe were shattered by revolutionary new developments – from the printing press over the discovery of America to the Reformation.
Neither King Nor God focuses on the struggle over military, religious, and commercial supremacy in Western Europe, with the Pope, the Holy Roman Emperor, and the Kings of England and France as the four protagonists. The players will send their courtiers to the big cities of Europe. These courtiers range from merchants over generals to assassins, each with their own action, forming a neat stack in each city. Once all courtiers are placed, each city’s courtier stack is resolved top to bottom – so, the last courtier placed is the first one to resolve! There are a lot of tactical considerations involved in which courtier you’d like to trigger early or late, and as they are placed face-down, also a good deal of bluffing.
I had the opportunity to play Neither King Nor God at last year’s SPIEL in Essen. Our Holy Roman Emperor attempted to spread Protestantism in Germany and waged war against the Pope for control of Venice, while France and England expanded their commercial networks on the continent and clashed over Normandy. Everyone had a great time!
The limited pilot edition of Neither King Nor God can be ordered for € 69.00 and will be shipping in mid- or late January. Sound of Drums aims to have the full epic edition ready for SPIEL in October 2026.
The European revolutions of 1848/49 are generally considered failures. After all, the ancient régimes had returned to power everywhere but in France, and even there the Second Republic was soon overthrown by Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte. Yet for months it looked like all of Europe could shed the old order in favor of liberalism, nation-states, and maybe even – gasp! – democracy. And even when the revolutionaries were defeated, they had changed the way the game was played: From then on, politics was conducted in public, with parliaments, parties, and newspapers, and the forces of liberalism and nationalism had to be taken into consideration by even the most conservative of monarchical governments.
Despite the impact of the revolutions, barely any games have covered them. Jules Félisaz’s 1848 seeks to rectify that in an ambitious manner, covering the political, military, intellectual, and social dimensions of the revolutions in all of Europe. Félisaz relies on a mix of tried-and-true CDG mechanics – the “mandatory opponent events” from Twilight Struggle, the spatial layout of societal groups from 1989, and the escalation through decks from Paths of Glory, adding its own twists where appropriate (for example, overlapping scoring regions based on nationality (German, Polish, Italian…) and empire (Russian, Prussian, Austrian).
Let us not say there are only wargames on this list. Look, here’s a peace game!
Making peace is generally a complex business, and so it was in the case of the Russo-Japanese War (1904/05): The Japanese, emboldened by their military success on land and sea, demanded a large financial indemnity as well as the cession of Sakhalin. The Russian tsar refused to consider either. Yet with revolution rampant in Russia and the Japanese government close to financial collapse, both sides needed to end the war. Their delegates at the US-mediated peace conference of Portsmouth had to figure out how to balance peace, national interest, and saving face.
In the classic two-player mode, the opponent players represent the delegates of Japan and Russia at Portsmouth who negotiate over Japan’s demands. Their hands of cards represent diplomatic approaches – listening or emphasizing, acquiescing or threatening. More aggressive stances are more likely to carry the day on any given issue, but the more lopsided a round of negotiations is, the more tensions will rise on the side of the loser. If they are pushed too hard, they will resort to war – and the other side will bear the blame for not being ready to compromise.
Other player counts see US president Theodore Roosevelt join as either as a third player or the solo role. In either case, Roosevelt is an “honest broker” whose goal it is to find an equitable resolution to the conflict.
Peace 1905 awaits its Kickstarter campaign in the second quarter of 2026. The game will be released in late 2026.
Hammer and sickle are, of course, the symbols of communism. Yet ideology aside, they speak of the material basis of modern societies – the food that everyone needs to eat, and the industrial production that is required for everything from building houses to waging war.
This economy underlies Hammer and Sickle, a multiplayer treatment of the Russian Civil War after the October Revolution: The industrial cities (mostly in the north and west of the collapsing Russian empire), marked by hammers, produce Firepower – provided that their workers are fed with Food (from the sickle-marked rural provinces in the south). Otherwise, the workers start to rebel.
The result is a delicate balance between Food and Firepower, exacerbated by the factions’ asymmetries: The Bolsheviks, for example, have easy access to a lot of hammers, but might find themselves short of sickles; but the opposite might be true for the White Army operating from the south. In addition to the game’s (loose) two alliances of Revolutionaries (Bolsheviks and Anarchists) and Counter-Revolutionaries (White Army and New Nations), new alignments might develop…
Alex Knight has shown his ability to turn a complex political-military struggle into a compelling board game with the Spanish Civil War in the intriguing Land and Freedom. I’m sure he’ll do the same with Hammer and Sickle.
You can pre-order Hammer and Sickle at the P500 price of $62.00 (regular price: $97.00). Release is expected not before the third quarter of 2026… which might turn into 2027, but I wanted to include the game here anyway because it just seems so fascinating.
Matthias Cramer has got the range. He has designed great epics like Weimar: The Fight for Democracy, but he is also a master of the short form. His Watergate is a knife fight in a phone booth… and Lenin’s Legacy promises to be cut from the same cloth.
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin was the dominant figure of the new Bolshevik government of Russia, but his health started to fail him soon after the October Revolution. Behind the scenes, his lieutenants jockeyed for position to succeed him – and the two likeliest candidates were Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. While they differed in their politics – Trotsky wanted to advance the “world revolution”, Stalin advocated for “socialism in one country” – and their power bases – Trotsky was the creator of the Red Army, Stalin controlled the Communist Party – they had one thing in common: Their drive to take power.
Lenin’s Legacy lets its players fill their shoes and struggle over the army, the party, and the regions and politicians of the Soviet Union in a card-driven game with a twist: Almost all cards are selected from an open market. The players hold only one card each… but they can gamble on playing the opponent’s card (without knowing what it is)!
Many of the games in this post are very zoomed-out, grand strategic affairs. The counters you push move armies, the cards you play shake nations. Yet there is also something very charming about games operating on the micro level, and you get exactly that with Night Witches.
You are on the Eastern Front of World War II, serving in the all-women 588th Night Bomber Regiment of the Soviet Air Forces. You have no more than two biplanes at your command in every mission… and they are old, slow, and vulnerable. Still, your goal is to harass the invading German forces with these low-flying, hard-to-detect, and hard-to-engage craft every night, do damage as much damage as you can (or, at least, wear the enemy out with constant nocturnal attacks), and make it back safe.
You can play each mission separately or in a ten-mission campaign which allows you to carry over upgrades, and either solo or as a two-player cooperative effort.
Night Witches awaits its Kickstarter campaign in the second quarter of 2026. The game will be released in late 2026.
This game has been long in the making. I’ve referenced it as ready for pre-order eight years ago, and have been intrigued by its premise since then. The Berlin Airlift was the largest airborne logistics operation ever, and for it to render the Berlin Blockade (on the ground) void, hundreds of planes had to arrive every day in Berlin with fuel, food, spare parts, and medical supplies, notwithstanding the limited infrastructure, the often rough weather, and every so often, Soviet interference.
This immense logistical task fell to the US Air Force and the Royal Air Force, each of which is represented by two “squadrons” (players) in the game. The players strive to contribute the most to the effort with their squadron, but their internal competition sometimes has to take the backseat when a joint effort is required to confront Soviet interference or keep the morale of the Berlin population up.
John Poniske’s original design has been taken on by Terry Simo. The Berlin Airlift is now ready for production. It can still be pre-ordered here at the reduced price of $55.00 (later MSRP estimated $75.00). Publication is expected for the third quarter of 2026.
And which 2026 games look most exciting to you? Let me know in the comments!
Happy new year, everybody! I hope it will bring you much joy. I also hope it will bring you board games (which is basically the same thing). The question is, however: Which games? – Here are a few 2026 releases which look most intriguing to me. Long-time readers of this blog will notice that this year’s list is a bit longer than usual – there are just so many fascinating games scheduled for release this year!
As always, don’t take this as a shopping list (neither for you nor for me). Your taste in games and your discretion how many new games you want to chase decide what will end up in your shelf (and, hopefully, on your table)!
After that reminder, on to the games. As all of them are set in human history, they are ordered from most ancient to most recent.
Once the greatest Roman politician-generals outgrew to confines of the republican power-sharing agreement, the Republic was bound to fall. Yet it was not predestined that it would fall to Caesar. In fact, two of his associates/rivals, Pompey and Crassus, might as well have taken the diadem… if they had played their cards better.
Triumvir casts its players as the three mightiest power brokers of the last years of the Roman Republic. They will attempt to parlay their wealth, popularity, and military force into political success (in an adaptation of the negotiation mechanic from Engelstein’s and Herman’s previous cooperation Versailles 1919). Whoever settles the issues in the senate in their favor and deals best with the challenges in the rebellious provinces is poised to become the First Man in Rome…forever.
I have a fondness for the early modern period, this time when so many old certainties in Europe were shattered by revolutionary new developments – from the printing press over the discovery of America to the Reformation.
Neither King Nor God focuses on the struggle over military, religious, and commercial supremacy in Western Europe, with the Pope, the Holy Roman Emperor, and the Kings of England and France as the four protagonists. The players will send their courtiers to the big cities of Europe. These courtiers range from merchants over generals to assassins, each with their own action, forming a neat stack in each city. Once all courtiers are placed, each city’s courtier stack is resolved top to bottom – so, the last courtier placed is the first one to resolve! There are a lot of tactical considerations involved in which courtier you’d like to trigger early or late, and as they are placed face-down, also a good deal of bluffing.
I had the opportunity to play Neither King Nor God at last year’s SPIEL in Essen. Our Holy Roman Emperor attempted to spread Protestantism in Germany and waged war against the Pope for control of Venice, while France and England expanded their commercial networks on the continent and clashed over Normandy. Everyone had a great time!
The limited pilot edition of Neither King Nor God can be ordered for € 69.00 and will be shipping in mid- or late January. Sound of Drums aims to have the full epic edition ready for SPIEL in October 2026.
The European revolutions of 1848/49 are generally considered failures. After all, the ancient régimes had returned to power everywhere but in France, and even there the Second Republic was soon overthrown by Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte. Yet for months it looked like all of Europe could shed the old order in favor of liberalism, nation-states, and maybe even – gasp! – democracy. And even when the revolutionaries were defeated, they had changed the way the game was played: From then on, politics was conducted in public, with parliaments, parties, and newspapers, and the forces of liberalism and nationalism had to be taken into consideration by even the most conservative of monarchical governments.
Despite the impact of the revolutions, barely any games have covered them. Jules Félisaz’s 1848 seeks to rectify that in an ambitious manner, covering the political, military, intellectual, and social dimensions of the revolutions in all of Europe. Félisaz relies on a mix of tried-and-true CDG mechanics – the “mandatory opponent events” from Twilight Struggle, the spatial layout of societal groups from 1989, and the escalation through decks from Paths of Glory, adding its own twists where appropriate (for example, overlapping scoring regions based on nationality (German, Polish, Italian…) and empire (Russian, Prussian, Austrian).
Let us not say there are only wargames on this list. Look, here’s a peace game!
Making peace is generally a complex business, and so it was in the case of the Russo-Japanese War (1904/05): The Japanese, emboldened by their military success on land and sea, demanded a large financial indemnity as well as the cession of Sakhalin. The Russian tsar refused to consider either. Yet with revolution rampant in Russia and the Japanese government close to financial collapse, both sides needed to end the war. Their delegates at the US-mediated peace conference of Portsmouth had to figure out how to balance peace, national interest, and saving face.
In the classic two-player mode, the opponent players represent the delegates of Japan and Russia at Portsmouth who negotiate over Japan’s demands. Their hands of cards represent diplomatic approaches – listening or emphasizing, acquiescing or threatening. More aggressive stances are more likely to carry the day on any given issue, but the more lopsided a round of negotiations is, the more tensions will rise on the side of the loser. If they are pushed too hard, they will resort to war – and the other side will bear the blame for not being ready to compromise.
Other player counts see US president Theodore Roosevelt join as either as a third player or the solo role. In either case, Roosevelt is an “honest broker” whose goal it is to find an equitable resolution to the conflict.
Peace 1905 awaits its Kickstarter campaign in the second quarter of 2026. The game will be released in late 2026.
Hammer and sickle are, of course, the symbols of communism. Yet ideology aside, they speak of the material basis of modern societies – the food that everyone needs to eat, and the industrial production that is required for everything from building houses to waging war.
This economy underlies Hammer and Sickle, a multiplayer treatment of the Russian Civil War after the October Revolution: The industrial cities (mostly in the north and west of the collapsing Russian empire), marked by hammers, produce Firepower – provided that their workers are fed with Food (from the sickle-marked rural provinces in the south). Otherwise, the workers start to rebel.
The result is a delicate balance between Food and Firepower, exacerbated by the factions’ asymmetries: The Bolsheviks, for example, have easy access to a lot of hammers, but might find themselves short of sickles; but the opposite might be true for the White Army operating from the south. In addition to the game’s (loose) two alliances of Revolutionaries (Bolsheviks and Anarchists) and Counter-Revolutionaries (White Army and New Nations), new alignments might develop…
Alex Knight has shown his ability to turn a complex political-military struggle into a compelling board game with the Spanish Civil War in the intriguing Land and Freedom. I’m sure he’ll do the same with Hammer and Sickle.
You can pre-order Hammer and Sickle at the P500 price of $62.00 (regular price: $97.00). Release is expected not before the third quarter of 2026… which might turn into 2027, but I wanted to include the game here anyway because it just seems so fascinating.
Matthias Cramer has got the range. He has designed great epics like Weimar: The Fight for Democracy, but he is also a master of the short form. His Watergate is a knife fight in a phone booth… and Lenin’s Legacy promises to be cut from the same cloth.
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin was the dominant figure of the new Bolshevik government of Russia, but his health started to fail him soon after the October Revolution. Behind the scenes, his lieutenants jockeyed for position to succeed him – and the two likeliest candidates were Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin. While they differed in their politics – Trotsky wanted to advance the “world revolution”, Stalin advocated for “socialism in one country” – and their power bases – Trotsky was the creator of the Red Army, Stalin controlled the Communist Party – they had one thing in common: Their drive to take power.
Lenin’s Legacy lets its players fill their shoes and struggle over the army, the party, and the regions and politicians of the Soviet Union in a card-driven game with a twist: Almost all cards are selected from an open market. The players hold only one card each… but they can gamble on playing the opponent’s card (without knowing what it is)!
Many of the games in this post are very zoomed-out, grand strategic affairs. The counters you push move armies, the cards you play shake nations. Yet there is also something very charming about games operating on the micro level, and you get exactly that with Night Witches.
You are on the Eastern Front of World War II, serving in the all-women 588th Night Bomber Regiment of the Soviet Air Forces. You have no more than two biplanes at your command in every mission… and they are old, slow, and vulnerable. Still, your goal is to harass the invading German forces with these low-flying, hard-to-detect, and hard-to-engage craft every night, do damage as much damage as you can (or, at least, wear the enemy out with constant nocturnal attacks), and make it back safe.
You can play each mission separately or in a ten-mission campaign which allows you to carry over upgrades, and either solo or as a two-player cooperative effort.
Night Witches awaits its Kickstarter campaign in the second quarter of 2026. The game will be released in late 2026.
This game has been long in the making. I’ve referenced it as ready for pre-order eight years ago, and have been intrigued by its premise since then. The Berlin Airlift was the largest airborne logistics operation ever, and for it to render the Berlin Blockade (on the ground) void, hundreds of planes had to arrive every day in Berlin with fuel, food, spare parts, and medical supplies, notwithstanding the limited infrastructure, the often rough weather, and every so often, Soviet interference.
This immense logistical task fell to the US Air Force and the Royal Air Force, each of which is represented by two “squadrons” (players) in the game. The players strive to contribute the most to the effort with their squadron, but their internal competition sometimes has to take the backseat when a joint effort is required to confront Soviet interference or keep the morale of the Berlin population up.
John Poniske’s original design has been taken on by Terry Simo. The Berlin Airlift is now ready for production. It can still be pre-ordered here at the reduced price of $55.00 (later MSRP estimated $75.00). Publication is expected for the third quarter of 2026.
And which 2026 games look most exciting to you? Let me know in the comments!
This is the 2 player game from one of my favourite games, Everdell is such a fun game with so many enjoyable characters and such a lovely town that you can build and explore and enjoy to your hearts content.
This is such a fun version of the game that takes so much less time to play yet doesn’t lack any of the fun of the original game If you are looking for a two player that will give you a lot of joy this is it and once you have played it , it can leave you so much more time to play again or play until another player turns up.
I was pleasantly surprised how much fun this game was and am very glad to have it in my collection. This is as much of a complex game to enjoy just a bit simpler to play. Using your critters to build your town to make the most points and win the game. In this case the critters are hares and tortoises, so you must ask yourselves are you slow and steady or likely to end up in a hedge somewhere wandering what happened.
After months of status updates on the World of Wingspan newsletter and a brief visual preview on last week’s livecast, yesterday I fully revealed the Wingspan Americas Expansion via our website, the Wingspan Facebook group, BoardGameGeek, and a newsletter. Over the next few days I’m sharing stories, mechanisms, photos, Instagram posts, and YouTube videos about the expansion, followed by third-party media starting on January 16. The expansion will launch on our webstores on January 21 (shared via our newsletter and ads) and arrive on tabletops around the world in February. Local retailers will release the expansion in late February, then online retailers in early March. Throughout 2026 the expansion will feature at conventions, release in various languages, and be reviewed by a diverse array of content creators.
Why the long paragraph listing these milestones? I realized recently that this method is quite similar to something I’ve experienced by searching for homes on Zillow.
Over the last few months, we’ve casually been looking at homes in St. Louis. There’s a certain joy in low-key browsing without any immediate pressure to buy (we’re perfectly happy at our small condo).
Like similar websites, Zillow lets you set some parameters, and it will notify you about homes that meet those parameters. You can also favorite specific homes that you’d like to follow more closely.
What has impressed me about this system is that it creates so many opportunities for contacting and engage potential customers (like me):
coming soon
new listing
open house
plan your weekend
price cut
take the next step
pending sale
sold
As I’ve received these notifications–which walk a fine line between not enough and too many–I’ve found myself wishing there was something like this for tabletop games. I could list the parameters of the types of games I love the most, follow the games that intrigue me, and get notifications for key milestones.
In the meantime, this is essentially what we do for people who choose to follow our games. We have our general monthly newsletter (plus Instagram, YouTube, and a Facebook page), and anyone who wants to follow a specific game or brand can do so via that game’s newsletter (or its Facebook group, BoardGameGeek, or Discord). This is followed by the various touchpoints I mentioned in the opening paragraph.
Cast a wide net, then engage deeper with those who want more info about specific products. The repeated points of contact are designed to avoid overwhelming you all at once, yet at any time you could choose to read the rulebook (or opt out if you decide the product isn’t a good fit).
Honestly, it’s also fun for the publisher: We’ve been working on this expansion for years, so I appreciate the opportunity to share it from different angles over weeks and months.
What do you think about the Zillow method? Have you seen it used well for tabletop games or other products?
Fobs Games put Tiefe Taschen out in the world back in 2016. It’s one of my favorite designs, uniquely presenting a tense affair of dynamic negotiation. It’s worthy of the word “brilliant”. By this virtue alone, I was interested in Gnomic Parliament. It’s the German publisher’s second release, arriving at the end of 2025. I…
Any man who must say “I am the king” is no true king.
Peter checks out Kings of War for the first time with the new 4th Edition!
It’s a brand new year – the 14th! – for the Esoteric Order of Gamers, and I’m kicking it off with a new project – Kings of War by Mantic Games! Will this be your new favourite game of fantasy battles? Stick with me over the coming weeks as I unbox, build, paint and play (and of course, make a rules summary for) this rank and flank fantasy tabletop miniatures game.
Making high quality tabletop gaming content at the EOG takes time and money. Please consider becoming a Patreon supporter or making a donation so I can continue this work! Thankyou!
I strongly believe in the importance of providing review copies to a vast variety of content creators so they can share their unbiased opinions with the audiences they serve. There were a lot of great games published in 2025, and I’m truly grateful for those who chose to play and feature Stonemaier products. I estimate that we send around 1,000 free Stonemaier products each year for reviews and other content via the system described below.
I genuinely hope content creators continue to seek joy in games (opposed to it feeling like a task, chore, or obligation). You have an amazing opportunity to add value to the people who value your insights and perspectives; it’s your choice to serve your audience instead of serving an algorithm.
If you’d like to sign up to potentially receive review copies of Stonemaier games, please read following article in full to understand our guidelines and procedures (within the article there is a link to a signup form). If you’re a relatively new content creator, please also read this post.
Overall Procedures
If you’re a reviewer or content creator on our list, I will contact you when we have review copies available. At that time, you will receive a message from me listing the products currently available for review, and you can choose one to receive (free product with free shipping). If you’re not on the list, you can sign up for consideration via the form linked in this article.
I kindly request that you follow this process rather than directly soliciting me for review copies, as it allows me to continuously provide products to hundreds of different content creators. For every product we offer numerous opportunities for you to receive review copies from us; if your schedule differs from ours, Stonemaier products are widely available for you to attain or play (on our webstore, from retailers, on digital platforms, and in non-English languages from localization partners).
Whenever I let our list of reviewers know that we have review copies available, I preface the email with these guidelines:
You do not already have a review copy (or an incoming review copy) from Stonemaier Games for which you haven’t posted substantial content.
You are available to feature the product you select in the next few months.
You don’t already have easy access to the product.
If you choose an expansion to review, you already own (or have access to) the core game.
If you are a content creator who wants to be considered for Stonemaier Games review copies, please read the following guidelines and sign up on the form within this article. Once you’re on the list, we’ll contact you when we have products available for review.
Here’s how we handle the various stages of review copies:
We only send 100% final versions of our products to reviewers, not prototypes.
Advance Review Copies: I typically receive 10-12 copies of new products via airmail from our manufacturer, Panda, a few months before we launch the product on our webstore. While I sometimes choose a few well-established reviewers for advance review copies, I also include some growing and underrepresented content creators. I provide a media date for those reviewers when they can start sharing their primary content about the product; the reason for this date is that we do not want to rush reviewers–we want them to have ample time to play the game, evaluate it, and compose their thoughts so their reviews can best serve their audience.
Early Review Copies: When our fulfillment centers receive the full ocean-freight shipments (typically a few weeks before the product launch), I reach out to a handful of content creators to see if they’re interested in receiving an early copy of the game. This is a marketing effort to reach as many people as possible, so typically these are reviewers with 20,000+ Instagram followers, 10,000+ YouTube subscribers, 1000+ podcast followers, hundreds of views per article (self-hosted or on BoardGameGeek), and/or who have medium-sized audiences with high levels of engagement.
First-Run Review Copies: After the initial product launch and fulfillment but before the retail release date, I contact more reviewers–most with smaller audiences than the early reviewers, but still good engagement from their audiences–to see if they would like the product. At this point, around 200 reviewers will have received a review request from me, and typically around 50-75 of them respond with interest. Your opinions are just as valid if your video, article, or podcast isn’t posted until a few days, weeks, months, or even years after the game’s announcement/launch/release. Your audience subscribes because of your insights and the quality of your content, not because you’re the first to get a new game.
Reprints and In-Stock Games: I don’t want all of the buzz and visibility of our products to only happen at the beginning of their lifespans, so I regularly offer review copies of reprints and in-stock games. This is typically when I reach out to content creators with small, growing audiences with less engagement (views, likes, comments).
New Signups and Newly Discovered Reviewers: Like any gamer, I discover new-to-me reviewers all the time, and if I really like their content or just want to make sure they’re better represented in the hobby, I may contact them directly to introduce myself and see if there are any Stonemaier products they’d like to review. We also receive new signups on the reviewer form all the time, so I give those reviewers a few chances throughout the first year to accept review copies and to share a link with me of the content they create for that product. If I don’t ever hear (via email) from reviewers who signed up for the list with a link to the content they create about the review copies, eventually I stop contacting them.
Damaged Games: Sometimes our customers report that they receive a damaged copy of one of our games (purchased from our webstore). In those cases, I often send them a mailing label to send the ding-and-dent game to a reviewer, and we send the customer a new game. Reviewers don’t need a perfect box to assess the experience of playing the game.
Other notes about our methods:
I Don’t Read/Watch/Listen to Reviews of Stonemaier Products: I highly value constructive criticism, of which I get plenty from playtesters and gamers. But for reviewers, I want to remain entirely unbiased and impartial to their tastes so consumers can get honest opinions from a wide variety of reviewers. I truly want all reviewers to know they can say anything they want about the Stonemaier products they play without feeling like I’m looking over their shoulder.
We Do Not Pay Reviewers to Express Their Opinions, Nor Do We Charge Reviewers for the Products They Review: If a content creator selects a free product from Stonemaier Games to feature, we ask that they disclose that information with full transparency in all related content. On some platforms, the only way to do this is to tag the post as a “paid promotion,” which, while not entirely accurate (we’re providing cardboard, not cash), is necessary until those platforms offer more accurate tags about material connections between reviewers and tabletop publishers. Here is an extensive survey of reviewers that reveals how exceptionally rare it is for publishers to offer reviewers money for their opinions.
Social Media vs Journalism: Simply being on social media does not make someone a content creator, reviewer, or journalist. I have the greatest appreciation for people who are consistently willing to spend time and effort to learn/play our games, publicly share their unbiased opinions in great detail, and contact us directly (and/or other sources for research) to ask questions about our business practices instead of making unfounded assumptions. That’s journalism. My email is jamey AT stonemaier.com.
We Ship to Reviewers the Same Way We Ship to Customers (from within their region): We ship from fulfillment centers in the US, Canada, Europe, and Australia. However, if a reviewer is ever charged customs/fees by their courier, we ask that they accept the package and then contact us so we can refund those charges.
Standard vs Deluxe: I clarified in an article the reasons that we only send content creators free copies of standard versions of our games (even if there are deluxe alternatives/add-ons). If you’re a content creator who chooses to purchase and showcase deluxe components, that’s totally fine–please just be sure to make it abundantly clear to your audience whenever you’re showcasing something that isn’t standard (to avoid any possible confusion).
I Consume a LOT of Review Content (Just Not for Our Games): At this point, I subscribe to around 750 different game-related articles, podcasts, and YouTube channels. I love hearing other people talk about games, whether they’re individuals or multiple hosts. You can see some of my favorites on our stuff we love page (see the archive section) and among our annual charity auction selections.
Feature and Focus: I’ve mentioned several times above that I ask content creators to select products of ours that they want to “feature.” From a publisher perspective (and, honestly, as an avid consumer of gaming content), I’m less interested in a podcast or video that’s about a bunch of different unrelated games (or a game haul Instagram post) instead of primarily featuring one or two specific games (or focusing on a specific category). “Featuring” a game also means going beyond just making a quick Instagram post or an unboxing clip.
A Distaste for Consistent Negativity, References to “Hype”, Clickbait, and Ragebait Tactics: I truly want reviewers to offer their honest feedback about games (whether their our games or games from other publishers). However, if a reviewer is consistently negative–for example, lists about games they hate or games that disappointed them–or is focused on “the hype,” as in “Does it live up to the hype?” (see this video and this video), I steer away from that content as a viewer (and such reviewers thus drop off my radar as a publisher too). To be clear, I have no problem with negative reviews of a game that a reviewer didn’t enjoy, especially if they take ownership over their dislike (“I didn’t enjoy it” or “it wasn’t for me” rather that “This game is bad/overrated/terrible”). But if you’re going to spend time making a top 5 or top 10 list, I simply can’t relate to someone who spends that time focusing on games they strongly dislike rather than games they enjoy. I also have a strong aversion to clickbait (titles and images) and ragebait tactics that don’t seem genuine to the creator or their content.
Brand-New Reviewers: If you’re excited to start reviewing tabletop games or you’ve only been posting for a few weeks, I highly recommend that you build up a solid base of content and an engaged audience using the games you already have access to before you request that any publisher send free games to you (as a rule of thumb, if you haven’t already created content for many games in your collection, it’s too soon to ask for free products). A mutually respectful and beneficial relationship between a reviewer and a publisher goes both ways. There’s more on this topic here.
Conventions: Attending conventions is incredibly expensive for publishers. There are so many expenses to have games, staff, and a demo team at conventions that we need to sell every possible copy to have a chance at breaking even. For that reason, please do not ask us for free review copies at conventions.
Permanent discoverability: Reviewers spend invaluable time and effort to play, photograph/film, and compose their thoughts–I believe that their content is worth finding months and years after the original post. So I greatly prefer when a creator’s content is permanently discoverable. Specifically, if you post reviews on Instagram, (a) build up an audience of at least 5000 engaged followers before requesting a free game AND (b) post your reviews somewhere that a search engine can find them long after the day when you first post (like an article or BoardGameGeek).
Written Reviews: We send hundreds of review copies to content creators focused on the written word, but for a few bigger releases we didn’t send any advance copies or text-focused journalists. After posting this article on the subject and reading the demand for such reviews in the comments, we committed to sending at least 1 advance copy of each product for a written review (followed by many more in subsequent waves).
Social Media Tags: If you post an article, podcast, or YouTube channel, a quick post on Instagram tagging @jameystegmaier makes it very easy for me to share the news (though I don’t see every post and thus can’t promise I’ll share ever post–I try my best!). Sidenote about Instagram: A personal pet peeve of mine is when I open an Instagram story and am blasted with music. I don’t want to blast anyone else with music, so it’s very rare that I share posts with audio.
Weekly roundups: Every Friday, I post on Facebook a list of all Stonemaier review links emailed to me by reviewers over the previous 7 days. While I’ve always posted these links on our website (and continue to do so), I’ve found this to be a more active way to share review content for the benefit of both the reviewers and our followers.
Featured content: If you accept a free review copy, we’re looking for substantial featured content. That is, we’re looking for more than a quick tweet or Instagram post (a series of such posts is more in line with the idea of “featuring” content). Featured content consists of more than a brief discussion among a number of other games and more than just a 1-2 minute standalone video.
I Say Yes to Every Interview: No matter the size of your channel, podcast, or website, if you want to chat with me to post a public interview on your platform, I’m happy to join you (and I think you’d be surprised by how many designers, publishers, and artists will do the same). There are a few small caveats to this–for example, you need to have some body of work posted publicly for me to first take a look at–but odds are very high I’ll agree to join you. Read more about this here.
Forge Your Own Path: There are many ways to approach content creation–your style and methods don’t need to copy what [insert your favorite famous reviewer] does. For example, I have a YouTube channel where I talk about games (mostly games by other designers/publishers). But I’m not a reviewer. Instead, I primarily focus on mechanisms: When I play a new-to-me game or expansion, I select my favorite mechanism and create a video about it. I also post weekly long-form videos (e.g., top 10s) that usually highlight a specific mechanism. I record every video in a single take using a webcam and a decent mic; most are completely unedited (I use StreamYard to share images of the game while I’m talking). I also decided a long time ago that I’m not a reviewer–just a publisher/designer who likes to talk about games–so I do not accept free copies of games (with very rare exceptions, I only play games I buy or that friends own).
Size Doesn’t Matter: I believe that review content is relevant whether you have 300 subscribers or 300,000. The only impact of size is how often I contact you about available review copies.
Why isn’t a content creator you know on this list? It’s probably some combination of reasons: They’ve been inactive for a long time, they don’t actually feature content for a free product they accepted (or they didn’t email me links to the content), they didn’t accept any review products for a long time, they’re on our private list but asked not to be on the public list, they never signed up for the list, their content doesn’t meet the above guidelines (too new, no permanent discoverability, clickbait tactics, etc), they’re in a region that is prohibitively expensive for shipping (we accept alternative addresses in regions we do ship to, though), or they consistently exhibit such high levels of antagonism to us and/or others that I simply want no association with them.
We understand that some reviewers receive hundreds of games, and it’s their choice to accept (or not accept) a free review copy from us given these stipulations.
Overall, I’m really grateful for the wide variety of content creators who take the time to share their perspectives with the gaming community. If you’re curious about my favorite content creators, I’ve most likely featured them on one of our annual charity auctions (like these creators in 2024,2023,2022, 20212020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, and 2013). There are also members of the media who cover gaming news, which I also appreciate.
Below is a list of all reviewers who have given me permission on the form to share their information with you. Over 25% of this list is comprised of underrepresented content creators–I’d love to further improve the diversity of this list! All you need to do after reading the above article is fill out the form; later, if/when you accept a review copy, please feature content for that product and send me a link.
This list doesn’t auto-update–it’s something I manually update once a year using our private list. In case scrolling within the list below is annoying, a full-page version is here. The data on the list may not be 100% accurate, as many reviewers filled out the form a while ago, so their stats and answers may not be up to date. I’m happy to update them upon request.
***
If you’re a publisher, what’s your approach to reviewers and other content creators? If you’re a gamer, how do reviewers impact your decision to buy games, expansions, and other products?
Step into the role of a United States Postal Inspector and work your way through three cases of increasing difficulty, each inspired by a real-life crime.
Typically I wait to announce new products until a few weeks before we’re ready to launch and ship them, but yesterday I tried something different: Taking inspiration from Nintendo Direct, Marvel Studios, and Garphill Games, I revealed our full 2026 product lineup on a YouTube and Facebook livecast, quarter by quarter.
There are a few reasons I did this:
I like to experiment with methods and approaches we haven’t tried before to see if they feel right to us and are useful/fun for our audience.
Based on the status of our 2026 products, I have high levels of certainty regarding the schedule. This isn’t always the case, even with our typical rough 3-year release roadmap.
Our 2026 is largely driven by expansions and new editions, so people already have a lot of context for the various reveals.
Previewing these products helps me learn how to talk about them clearly and succinctly while I gauge people’s responses to different information and phrasing.
The method I used for the reveals was a premiere video via Streamyard (livecast simultaneously on YouTube and Facebook), with the link posted around a day in advance and in a newsletter I sent 15 minutes before the livecast. I spent around 15 minutes per quarter, using tangible visuals (cards, boards, art, etc) from almost every product to convey the idea that these are real products that do/will exist.
During the reveals, I intentionally didn’t show the box covers or even the product names. This was just a preview; the full reveal for these products will come much closer to their respective launches, and I think it’s far too soon for them to appear on BoardGameGeek. I answered some questions about the products, but I didn’t get into the weeds of card quantities, sizes, pricing, etc.
At the end of the video, I asked people for feedback on the format, and people universally said they liked that it offered things to look forward to throughout the year and the ability to plan ahead (especially for expansions). Some said that the preview felt like the opposite of a FOMO tactic, which isn’t something I had thought about, but I was happy to hear that.
Here’s a quick recap of what I revealed in the video:
Q1: Wingspan expansion (based on the birds of Central and South America and the Caribbean; vision friendly cards are available as an add-on) and a Viticulture expansion (a new 4-season board with the original board on the back)
Q2: Euphoria Essential (combines the expansion with the core game and offers a new board layout with some rules tweaks; the board and rules will be available separately for those who already have Euphoria) and the first Finspan expansion (I previewed a shark card and a colorful fish)
Q3: Scythe vs Expeditions 2-player dueling game (this content expands Scythe and Expeditions, and all Scythe factions/player mats and Expeditions mechs/characters are compatible with the dueling game; there will be add-on packs containing metal versions of the mechs and a plastic airship [which isn’t used in the dueling game]), a small-box, lighter Wingspan bird experience playable in around 3o minutes, and a mini-expansion to Origin Story (many more superheroes)
Q4: The first Smoking Bones game from artist and worldbuilder Andrew Bosley and a debut designer (see some info about the world here) and our version of Namiji (combines the core game and the expansion in a normal box size with accessibility updates)
reprints for the Nesting Box and Rolling Realm promos (other reprints for out-of-stock products are dependent on demand as indicated by back-in-stock requests on our webstore)
There are visuals and details in the video, and I’m happy to answer some questions in the comments.
We send semi-monthly newsletters for many of our games that include future teasers and details, recent reviews and content, and more. Here is the most recent edition of each update; each includes a link to subscribe if you’d like to stay in touch.
Why, hello there. How have you been? It’s been a few months. I’m doing well, enjoying my retirement from the blogosphere. I’m not really back, I just wanted to pop in and give my annual recap of all the new-to-me games played in 2025. Plus, I’ll be picking the winner of the prestigious Spiel des Jesse award at the end. Thanks for joining me!
We’ll start with the new-to-me games. I’ll be providing a rating for each on my patented Yeah-Meh-Bleah scale (which, for legal reasons, I probably should let you know is NOT actually patented).
12 Days: A card game based around the 12 Days of Christmas song. It’s interesting, but becomes very much about luck in the end. The art is nice. RATING: Meh+.
12 Patrols: A print-and-play game that really ends up being a puzzle as to how to place your pieces in order to satisfy demands. It’s a very pretty game, and an interesting concept, but luck is definitely a factor and can frustrate the experience. RATING: Meh+.
14ers: A card game about climbing the highest peaks in Colorado. Actually, it’s more a game about upgrading your hiker, but summiting those peaks gets you actions to add using an interesting tuck mechanism. I’ve only played it online so far, but enjoyed it. RATING: Yeah.
Abstract: A print-and-play game where you’re rolling dice and arranging colors to create your art. There’s variable scoring conditions from game to game. I only played solo, but you can compete for the highest score, even though there’s no competition. Not bad. RATING: Meh+.
Ambagibus: A print-and-play tile placement game where’s you’re basically building a maze. It’s a puzzle, but there’s not a lot to it. You need a lot of luck to win. RATING: Meh.
Bag of Chips: A light speculation game that comes packaged in a chip bag. It’s kind of silly, but good enough for what it is. RATING: Meh.
Beer and Pretzels: A super light tossing game where you’re just trying to score points by getting your stuff in a circle to show their numbers. Not really desperate to try again. RATING: Meh-.
Bites: Another speculation game where you’re trying to collect items you think will score the most points. Beautiful production, and a pretty good game that I was unaware of before trying it. RATING: Yeah.
Bring Your Own Book: Players try to find lines in their own books to fit a certain prompt. It’s a concept that is more interesting than, say, Apples to Apples, but still has the shortcomings of being a subjective judging game. Still, one of the better ones of that genre. RATING: Meh-.
Call To Adventure: Epic Origins: An adventure game where you’re throwing runestones to get the symbols you need for success. It’s a very interesting game. I’ve only played one game of the campaign so far, but enjoying it. RATING: Yeah.
Canvas: A card-crafting style game where you’re creating art by putting transparent cards into sleeves. There’s drafting, there’s variable scoring conditions, and there’s the puzzle of trying to make your art worth more. It’s really good. RATING: Yeah!
Clank! In! Space!: I love the original Clank, but this was my first time trying the space version. It was a lot of fun, and I like the modular system in place. I wish I had gotten to play more during the year. RATING: Yeah!
CuBirds: This is a game I had played online, but I don’t think I ever really got it until playing it in person. It’s an interesting set collection game with an interesting draft system. I like it, and my wife loves it (possibly because she beats me all the time). RATING: Yeah.
Daybreak: A cooperative game that won the 2024 Kinderspiel des Jahres. It’s all about trying to combat climate change. There’s a lot going on, and you’ve really got to communicate with your fellow players. I only played solo, but it would be good to play with others. RATING: Yeah!
Deadly Doodles: Basically a flip and write game where you’re making a path through a dungeon, trying to kill monsters and collect treasure. I was expecting something very different than what I got – the only “doodling” was drawing lines through the dungeon. In the end, it felt like a weak imitation of Railroad Ink. RATING: Meh.
Earth: With the buzz around this, I was expecting something I liked more. In the end, I thought it was more bloated than in needed to be. It’s got fairly simple mechanisms, but just so many moving parts that I wasn’t crazy about it. Also, didn’t like the solo mode – it felt rushed. RATING: Meh+.
Everdell: Finally increased my Geek Cred by playing this game. It’s good – I liked the system of taking things at your own pace and deciding when to recall your workers. As cool as the tree looks, I can see that thing being very annoying. RATING: Yeah.
Evergreen: From the designer of Photosynthesis, which is a game I disliked. And even though this is another tree game using a similar sun mechanism, I liked this one a lot more. Not quite as mean. RATING: Yeah.
Faraway: A reverse scoring game where you’re going on a journey, then coming back to fulfill quests with things you have collected. It works really well, I wish I had gotten to play more. RATING: Yeah!
Flamecraft: Dragons! The shops worked very well, but it felt like the game had a few too many parts for what was essentially a recipe fulfillment game. RATING: Yeah.
Flyin’ Goblin: It was fun to catapult goblins. However, the game didn’t quite work for me. Part of the problem was probably that we got an important rule wrong, but I still don’t think it was quite my game. RATING: Meh.
Gloomhaven: Buttons and Bugs: I still haven’t played the original Gloomhaven, but did play this tiny version for one player because my local library has a copy. It was fun, very small, but good. I’ll need to check it out again sometimes. RATING: Yeah.
Green Team Wins: My mom always wants to be green, so we got her a copy of this for her birthday. I’m not much of a party game guy, but this one does the “game” part pretty well. RATING: Yeah.
The Guild of Merchant Explorers: This game is VERY BEIGE. But I really liked it. It’s another one I got from the library, and has some really clever mechanisms. It’s almost, but not quite, multiplayer solitaire. RATING: Yeah!
Home Alone: It’s a one vs. all game, and works pretty well thematically. It seems pretty heavily weighted towards Kevin, which makes sense, but can be frustrating. RATING: Meh+.
Imperial Settlers: Got this in a math trade. I’ve only played solo so far, but I’ve enjoyed what I have played. It’s not terribly complicated once you figure out the basic mechanisms. My biggest problem with the game is that the text on the cards is very small. RATING: Yeah.
LANTERN: Another print-and-play. There are some very interesting things going on here, and it was surprisingly strategic for a quick dice-roller. RATING: Yeah.
The Lord of the Rings: Duel for Middle-Earth: This LOTR themed version of 7 Wonders Duel is really good, the components are just weaker than I was hoping for. RATING: Yeah!
Make That Most Magnificent Thing: A kid’s game about building contraptions. Actually, I shouldn’t say game – it’s an exercise in creativity, but there’s not really any game in there. You’re just grabbing pieces, putting something together, showing it off, then arbitrarily assigning ribbons that don’t count for points and maybe don’t carry over from round to round? The rules are very vague. RATING: Bleah as a game, meh as an activity.
Meadow: A drafting game about building up your meadow. I really enjoyed it – there are clever mechanisms, nice art, and a pretty good solo mode. RATING: Yeah!
Monumental: A big, beautiful civilization-themed deck-building game with a modular board. There’s a lot to do on a turn, which can lead to a lot of downtime. Many moving parts, but overall enjoyable. RATING: Yeah.
Mountain Goats: I had played this previously on yucata.de, but had my first physical play, so I’m counting it. It’s a very simple push-your-luck kind of game with dice and goat. It’s fun. RATING: Yeah.
Noodle Knockout!: This is my son’s game. It’s got a good dexterity element to it, but not much game. RATING: Bleah.
Oh My Pigeons!: This is really not my kind of game. Too much take that, too random. The pigeons are cute and the game is quick, but that’s about it. RATING: Bleah!
River Valley Glassworks: A pretty set collection game with glass floating down a river. The scoring concepts are a little tough to get your head around, but it’s fun. RATING: Yeah.
So Clover! I’m still not one for party games, but this was good. The deduction here is excellent. I’d classify it as more of an activity than a game, but it’s solid. RATING: Yeah.
Spots: Probably my biggest surprise of the year. This is a dice rolling recipe fulfillment style game where you’re just trying to fill in the spots on your dogs. Different actions every game, and it produced one of the best in-jokes my family has had this year (Doog is Doog). RATING: Yeah!
Super Mega Lucky Box: Basically Bingo with more strategy. There’s not much else to say for it – I like it more than Bingo. RATING: Yeah.
Switchbacks: A small and light placement game where you’re just trying to get numbers in a row. It’s fairly simple, and a good quick game. RATING: Yeah.
Tales of the Arthurian Knights: This updated version of Tales of the Arabian Knights moves the system to the Arthurian legend. It’s much more forgiving than the original with longer stories. It also has a cooperative mode, which is exclusively how we play it. RATING: Yeah!
That’s Not a Hat: A party game that’s about memory. It’s very simple, and I can see how people who like party games might like it. Not for me. RATING: Bleah.
Tiny Epic Galaxies: This is only the second Tiny Epic game I’ve tried, and I was able to check this one out from the library. I’ve only done the solo mode, and I liked it, though it took me a bit to get my head around the rules. RATING: Yeah.
Trailblazers: Another library game that’s about building trails. It’s very puzzly and takes some luck to get to your goals. My wife really disliked it, but I enjoyed it. RATING: Yeah.
Trogdor!! Probably my second biggest surprise this year. I am very familiar with Homestar Runner and TROGDOR!!, but had never had a chance to play this game before. It was honestly kind of a dumb game, but fun. There’s a lot of luck involved. RATING: Yeah.
Urbion: Never played the original game, but the second edition is out now and I enjoyed it. It’s a game about balance, and very well implemented. RATING: Yeah!
We’re Doomed: A game about trying to escape the end of the world. I will say this game was pretty funny, but in the end, it’s just too mean and lucky for me. RATING: Bleah.
Wingspan Asia: A 1-2 player version of Wingspan. It adds an interesting new layer to the system with the duet board. My biggest complaint is that there weren’t enough eggs. Only played once, I need to explore some more. RATING: Yeah.
Wordsnap: Scrabble, but with interlocking tiles and no board. It’s a good puzzle for people who like word puzzle, but I don’t know that it adds too much more to the genre other than the components. RATING: Meh.
And now, on to the nominees for this year’s Spiel des Jesse. Long time fans may know the criteria already, but here it is again for anyone new to this space: any game is eligible for the award if I played it for the first time during 2025, and as long as I played it at least twice. This cuts out a few games that probably would have made the nomination list, including Daybreak, River Valley Glassworks, and Everdell, among others. From the games that were eligible, here’s my shortlist:
Canvas (2021; designed by Jeff Chin and Andrew Nerger; published by Road to Infamy Games)
The Guild of Merchant Explorers (2022; designed by Matthew Dunstan and Brett J. Gilbert; published by AEG)
The Lord of the Rings: Duel for Middle-Earth (2024; designed by Antoine Bauza and Bruno Cathala; published by Repos Production)
Meadow (2021; designed by Klemens Kalicki; published by Rebel Studio)
Spots (2022; designed by Alex Hague, Jon Perry, and Justin Vickers; published by CMYK)
Tales of the Arthurian Knights (2024; designed by Eric Goldberg and Andrew Parks; published by WizKids)
This was a tough year to decide – all of these are great games, but I don’t know how much any one of them stood out over the others. Still, there can only be one, and I think that this year it will be…
image by BGG user Asia_Rebel
I really like the drafting in Meadow, and the way the cards interact to form new combos and scoring opportunities. It’s a beautiful game, plays well multiplayer and solo, and I like it a lot. So, that’s my pick, and it joins Argent: The Consortium (2014), Colt Express (2015), Burgle Bros (2016), Clank! (2017), Azul (2018), Rhino Hero Super Battle (2019), Roll Player (2020), The Isle of Cats (2021), Mandala (2022), Fantasy Realms (2023), and Lost Ruins of Arnak (2024) in the exclusive club of previous Spiel des Jesse winners.
Time to crawl back into my hole. Thanks for joining me for this annual recap. Right now, I plan to come back in June or July to do my annual Spiel des Jahres picks, but who knows. Thanks for reading!
Why, hello there. How have you been? It’s been a few months. I’m doing well, enjoying my retirement from the blogosphere. I’m not really back, I just wanted to pop in and give my annual recap of all the new-to-me games played in 2025. Plus, I’ll be picking the winner of the prestigious Spiel des Jesse award at the end. Thanks for joining me!
We’ll start with the new-to-me games. I’ll be providing a rating for each on my patented Yeah-Meh-Bleah scale (which, for legal reasons, I probably should let you know is NOT actually patented).
12 Days: A card game based around the 12 Days of Christmas song. It’s interesting, but becomes very much about luck in the end. The art is nice. RATING: Meh+.
12 Patrols: A print-and-play game that really ends up being a puzzle as to how to place your pieces in order to satisfy demands. It’s a very pretty game, and an interesting concept, but luck is definitely a factor and can frustrate the experience. RATING: Meh+.
14ers: A card game about climbing the highest peaks in Colorado. Actually, it’s more a game about upgrading your hiker, but summiting those peaks gets you actions to add using an interesting tuck mechanism. I’ve only played it online so far, but enjoyed it. RATING: Yeah.
Abstract: A print-and-play game where you’re rolling dice and arranging colors to create your art. There’s variable scoring conditions from game to game. I only played solo, but you can compete for the highest score, even though there’s no competition. Not bad. RATING: Meh+.
Ambagibus: A print-and-play tile placement game where’s you’re basically building a maze. It’s a puzzle, but there’s not a lot to it. You need a lot of luck to win. RATING: Meh.
Bag of Chips: A light speculation game that comes packaged in a chip bag. It’s kind of silly, but good enough for what it is. RATING: Meh.
Beer and Pretzels: A super light tossing game where you’re just trying to score points by getting your stuff in a circle to show their numbers. Not really desperate to try again. RATING: Meh-.
Bites: Another speculation game where you’re trying to collect items you think will score the most points. Beautiful production, and a pretty good game that I was unaware of before trying it. RATING: Yeah.
Bring Your Own Book: Players try to find lines in their own books to fit a certain prompt. It’s a concept that is more interesting than, say, Apples to Apples, but still has the shortcomings of being a subjective judging game. Still, one of the better ones of that genre. RATING: Meh-.
Call To Adventure: Epic Origins: An adventure game where you’re throwing runestones to get the symbols you need for success. It’s a very interesting game. I’ve only played one game of the campaign so far, but enjoying it. RATING: Yeah.
Canvas: A card-crafting style game where you’re creating art by putting transparent cards into sleeves. There’s drafting, there’s variable scoring conditions, and there’s the puzzle of trying to make your art worth more. It’s really good. RATING: Yeah!
Clank! In! Space!: I love the original Clank, but this was my first time trying the space version. It was a lot of fun, and I like the modular system in place. I wish I had gotten to play more during the year. RATING: Yeah!
CuBirds: This is a game I had played online, but I don’t think I ever really got it until playing it in person. It’s an interesting set collection game with an interesting draft system. I like it, and my wife loves it (possibly because she beats me all the time). RATING: Yeah.
Daybreak: A cooperative game that won the 2024 Kinderspiel des Jahres. It’s all about trying to combat climate change. There’s a lot going on, and you’ve really got to communicate with your fellow players. I only played solo, but it would be good to play with others. RATING: Yeah!
Deadly Doodles: Basically a flip and write game where you’re making a path through a dungeon, trying to kill monsters and collect treasure. I was expecting something very different than what I got – the only “doodling” was drawing lines through the dungeon. In the end, it felt like a weak imitation of Railroad Ink. RATING: Meh.
Earth: With the buzz around this, I was expecting something I liked more. In the end, I thought it was more bloated than in needed to be. It’s got fairly simple mechanisms, but just so many moving parts that I wasn’t crazy about it. Also, didn’t like the solo mode – it felt rushed. RATING: Meh+.
Everdell: Finally increased my Geek Cred by playing this game. It’s good – I liked the system of taking things at your own pace and deciding when to recall your workers. As cool as the tree looks, I can see that thing being very annoying. RATING: Yeah.
Evergreen: From the designer of Photosynthesis, which is a game I disliked. And even though this is another tree game using a similar sun mechanism, I liked this one a lot more. Not quite as mean. RATING: Yeah.
Faraway: A reverse scoring game where you’re going on a journey, then coming back to fulfill quests with things you have collected. It works really well, I wish I had gotten to play more. RATING: Yeah!
Flamecraft: Dragons! The shops worked very well, but it felt like the game had a few too many parts for what was essentially a recipe fulfillment game. RATING: Yeah.
Flyin’ Goblin: It was fun to catapult goblins. However, the game didn’t quite work for me. Part of the problem was probably that we got an important rule wrong, but I still don’t think it was quite my game. RATING: Meh.
Gloomhaven: Buttons and Bugs: I still haven’t played the original Gloomhaven, but did play this tiny version for one player because my local library has a copy. It was fun, very small, but good. I’ll need to check it out again sometimes. RATING: Yeah.
Green Team Wins: My mom always wants to be green, so we got her a copy of this for her birthday. I’m not much of a party game guy, but this one does the “game” part pretty well. RATING: Yeah.
The Guild of Merchant Explorers: This game is VERY BEIGE. But I really liked it. It’s another one I got from the library, and has some really clever mechanisms. It’s almost, but not quite, multiplayer solitaire. RATING: Yeah!
Home Alone: It’s a one vs. all game, and works pretty well thematically. It seems pretty heavily weighted towards Kevin, which makes sense, but can be frustrating. RATING: Meh+.
Imperial Settlers: Got this in a math trade. I’ve only played solo so far, but I’ve enjoyed what I have played. It’s not terribly complicated once you figure out the basic mechanisms. My biggest problem with the game is that the text on the cards is very small. RATING: Yeah.
LANTERN: Another print-and-play. There are some very interesting things going on here, and it was surprisingly strategic for a quick dice-roller. RATING: Yeah.
The Lord of the Rings: Duel for Middle-Earth: This LOTR themed version of 7 Wonders Duel is really good, the components are just weaker than I was hoping for. RATING: Yeah!
Make That Most Magnificent Thing: A kid’s game about building contraptions. Actually, I shouldn’t say game – it’s an exercise in creativity, but there’s not really any game in there. You’re just grabbing pieces, putting something together, showing it off, then arbitrarily assigning ribbons that don’t count for points and maybe don’t carry over from round to round? The rules are very vague. RATING: Bleah as a game, meh as an activity.
Meadow: A drafting game about building up your meadow. I really enjoyed it – there are clever mechanisms, nice art, and a pretty good solo mode. RATING: Yeah!
Monumental: A big, beautiful civilization-themed deck-building game with a modular board. There’s a lot to do on a turn, which can lead to a lot of downtime. Many moving parts, but overall enjoyable. RATING: Yeah.
Mountain Goats: I had played this previously on yucata.de, but had my first physical play, so I’m counting it. It’s a very simple push-your-luck kind of game with dice and goat. It’s fun. RATING: Yeah.
Noodle Knockout!: This is my son’s game. It’s got a good dexterity element to it, but not much game. RATING: Bleah.
Oh My Pigeons!: This is really not my kind of game. Too much take that, too random. The pigeons are cute and the game is quick, but that’s about it. RATING: Bleah!
River Valley Glassworks: A pretty set collection game with glass floating down a river. The scoring concepts are a little tough to get your head around, but it’s fun. RATING: Yeah.
So Clover! I’m still not one for party games, but this was good. The deduction here is excellent. I’d classify it as more of an activity than a game, but it’s solid. RATING: Yeah.
Spots: Probably my biggest surprise of the year. This is a dice rolling recipe fulfillment style game where you’re just trying to fill in the spots on your dogs. Different actions every game, and it produced one of the best in-jokes my family has had this year (Doog is Doog). RATING: Yeah!
Super Mega Lucky Box: Basically Bingo with more strategy. There’s not much else to say for it – I like it more than Bingo. RATING: Yeah.
Switchbacks: A small and light placement game where you’re just trying to get numbers in a row. It’s fairly simple, and a good quick game. RATING: Yeah.
Tales of the Arthurian Knights: This updated version of Tales of the Arabian Knights moves the system to the Arthurian legend. It’s much more forgiving than the original with longer stories. It also has a cooperative mode, which is exclusively how we play it. RATING: Yeah!
That’s Not a Hat: A party game that’s about memory. It’s very simple, and I can see how people who like party games might like it. Not for me. RATING: Bleah.
Tiny Epic Galaxies: This is only the second Tiny Epic game I’ve tried, and I was able to check this one out from the library. I’ve only done the solo mode, and I liked it, though it took me a bit to get my head around the rules. RATING: Yeah.
Trailblazers: Another library game that’s about building trails. It’s very puzzly and takes some luck to get to your goals. My wife really disliked it, but I enjoyed it. RATING: Yeah.
Trogdor!! Probably my second biggest surprise this year. I am very familiar with Homestar Runner and TROGDOR!!, but had never had a chance to play this game before. It was honestly kind of a dumb game, but fun. There’s a lot of luck involved. RATING: Yeah.
Urbion: Never played the original game, but the second edition is out now and I enjoyed it. It’s a game about balance, and very well implemented. RATING: Yeah!
We’re Doomed: A game about trying to escape the end of the world. I will say this game was pretty funny, but in the end, it’s just too mean and lucky for me. RATING: Bleah.
Wingspan Asia: A 1-2 player version of Wingspan. It adds an interesting new layer to the system with the duet board. My biggest complaint is that there weren’t enough eggs. Only played once, I need to explore some more. RATING: Yeah.
Wordsnap: Scrabble, but with interlocking tiles and no board. It’s a good puzzle for people who like word puzzle, but I don’t know that it adds too much more to the genre other than the components. RATING: Meh.
And now, on to the nominees for this year’s Spiel des Jesse. Long time fans may know the criteria already, but here it is again for anyone new to this space: any game is eligible for the award if I played it for the first time during 2025, and as long as I played it at least twice. This cuts out a few games that probably would have made the nomination list, including Daybreak, River Valley Glassworks, and Everdell, among others. From the games that were eligible, here’s my shortlist:
Canvas (2021; designed by Jeff Chin and Andrew Nerger; published by Road to Infamy Games)
The Guild of Merchant Explorers (2022; designed by Matthew Dunstan and Brett J. Gilbert; published by AEG)
The Lord of the Rings: Duel for Middle-Earth (2024; designed by Antoine Bauza and Bruno Cathala; published by Repos Production)
Meadow (2021; designed by Klemens Kalicki; published by Rebel Studio)
Spots (2022; designed by Alex Hague, Jon Perry, and Justin Vickers; published by CMYK)
Tales of the Arthurian Knights (2024; designed by Eric Goldberg and Andrew Parks; published by WizKids)
This was a tough year to decide – all of these are great games, but I don’t know how much any one of them stood out over the others. Still, there can only be one, and I think that this year it will be…
image by BGG user Asia_Rebel
I really like the drafting in Meadow, and the way the cards interact to form new combos and scoring opportunities. It’s a beautiful game, plays well multiplayer and solo, and I like it a lot. So, that’s my pick, and it joins Argent: The Consortium (2014), Colt Express (2015), Burgle Bros (2016), Clank! (2017), Azul (2018), Rhino Hero Super Battle (2019), Roll Player (2020), The Isle of Cats (2021), Mandala (2022), Fantasy Realms (2023), and Lost Ruins of Arnak (2024) in the exclusive club of previous Spiel des Jesse winners.
Time to crawl back into my hole. Thanks for joining me for this annual recap. Right now, I plan to come back in June or July to do my annual Spiel des Jahres picks, but who knows. Thanks for reading!
Still enjoying The Great British Baking Show as a cozy watch. But even if you don’t watch it, here’s a great phrase — “A total bag of pants” (meaning a disaster). Has entered my lexicon and I’m experimenting with all the “<container> of <garment>” combos. And also watching Prue Leith (an 80 year old proper British Matriarch type, but with an Austin Powers 60’s flair) innocently ask things like “Tell us about your beaver,” or “I am interested in your large nuts” never gets old. Sadly only have a series or two left to watch.
Maybe
The 9th Configuration — An insane 70s movie (although released in early 80) set in a military insane asylum where the inmates apparently have access to a Hollywood prop department to enact whatever crazy stuff they want. Written, Produced and Directed by William Blatty (fresh of The Exorcist) so the studios were willing to let him do whatever he wanted. Some great scenes and mostly great but nonsensical dialogue. I had to watch it in chunks. Definitely a noble failure and not a cookie cutter movie.
Grantchester — A Masterpiece Mystery that is definitely ripping off Father Brown1. (Except that the priest is Anglican? Church of England? In any case, Not Catholic and it’s post WW-II instead of WW-I). But I like Father Brown and this is close enough for me. But as the series goes on it gets less about the mystery of the week and more about the main character(s) being miserable, and lost a fair chunk of the joy2. (Netflix only has the first four of the ten(!) seasons).
In the Mouth of Madness — A (90s) rewatch of which I remembered almost nothing. Attempts to capture Lovecraftian dread, but the execution isn’t quite there. Some genuinely creepy moments but also too reliant on “repeated dream awakenings” and re-used footage. Amazing to think that John Carpenter did this a decade after The Thing, because the monster effects are a step down; less is more would have been so much better here3. But …. any schlock horror movie is elevated by David Warner & Jürgen Prochnow looks very anti-christ-like. Clever ending, but “ah, that’s clever” clever instead of a gut punch. I think it works better if you simply lop off the last few minutes.4
The Long Kiss Goodnight — (90s Rewatch, pt II). Shane Black makes another Shane Black movie. Action movie? Check! Partners who don’t like each other? Check! Banter? Christmastime? Checkity Check! Sadly this isn’t up the the heights that Lethal Weapon started, but its not bad.
Nobody Wants This (S2) — A reasonable ‘comfort food’ romcom/sitcom. Sometimes veers into cringe, but it understands that a romcom/sitcom must be funny (and heartwarming) so that both Mr. and Mrs. Tao will watch.
Under the Skin (book) — Read this after watching the movie (see Sep-Oct). Good, but in a very different way (books can show inner monologues, movies are visual). I think that the near silence of the movie was a good choice, but that necessitated changing the story to make it much more ambiguous. Note — Not for the squeamish.
Wick is Pain — Documentary on the John Wick Franchise. Reasonable if you liked the franchise. What impressed me was seeing stunts that I said “Obvious CGI” in the theater and then discovering that the CGI was only for the environment, not the stunt itself, which was real. (The building fall at the end of John Wick 2)
Maybe Not
Turned Off / Not Recommended
“Oh, Hi!” — I saw this recommended by Marginal Revolution. The plot is that a young couple go on a weekend vacation, find some bondage equipment, he gets tied up and (after sex) reveals that he doesn’t consider this a serious relationship, at which point she leaves him tied up and tries to convince him that she is girlfriend material. BUT nobody is sympathetic. She’s crazy. (It’s established that she considered stabbing her last boyfriend). “Leave him tied up” isn’t played for laughs, and isn’t funny. On the other hand, she’s right. You don’t go on a weekend trip alone after dating for four months and expect her to think it’s a fling. In Re: “Crazy girl” vs “Idiot Boy” I find both guilty. Turned off at the 30 minute mark (or less), tried to continue a few times. Failed. Now re-reading Marginal Revolution I realized that “better than expected retelling of…” isn’t necessarily an endorsement.5
Tenet — This finally showed up on streaming and … man; was Christopher Nolan trolling us the entire time6? “What if I just didn’t have a plot at all, but did as much cool stuff as possible?” Turned off before the hour mark; tried again and couldn’t get through another few minutes. It’s like a Bond movie with truly excellent set pieces and locations. (Off-brand Bond but not skimping on quality). Plus Time-travel special effects. But when you break it open it’s just Nelson Munz “Hah hah!”-ing you, the sucker audience.
OK, its an actual series of books on its own that started a few years ago, and the author’s father was formerly the Archbishop of Canterbury, but still … ︎
After finishing season 4 I realize that part of that was the requirements to switch the lead actors. ︎
Such as the people in an oil painting moving. If they never moved on camera and if you thought they had but weren’t sure, it would have been creepier. ︎
For example — Sam Neill’s character “sees” the carnage in the hallway (a ‘less is more shot’, where you see vague shadows and hear screams), realizes the door keeping him the sanitarium is busted … and then chooses to retreat to his room & close the door. ︎
But then I see it’s on his years best film list, so uh, whatever. ︎
No, mostly he’s pretty good. I guess this was just a misfire. ︎
Still enjoying The Great British Baking Show as a cozy watch. But even if you don’t watch it, here’s a great phrase — “A total bag of pants” (meaning a disaster). Has entered my lexicon and I’m experimenting with all the “<container> of <garment>” combos. And also watching Prue Leith (an 80 year old proper British Matriarch type, but with an Austin Powers 60’s flair) innocently ask things like “Tell us about your beaver,” or “I am interested in your large nuts” never gets old. Sadly only have a series or two left to watch.
Maybe
The 9th Configuration — An insane 70s movie (although released in early 80) set in a military insane asylum where the inmates apparently have access to a Hollywood prop department to enact whatever crazy stuff they want. Written, Produced and Directed by William Blatty (fresh of The Exorcist) so the studios were willing to let him do whatever he wanted. Some great scenes and mostly great but nonsensical dialogue. I had to watch it in chunks. Definitely a noble failure and not a cookie cutter movie.
Grantchester — A Masterpiece Mystery that is definitely ripping off Father Brown1. (Except that the priest is Anglican? Church of England? In any case, Not Catholic and it’s post WW-II instead of WW-I). But I like Father Brown and this is close enough for me. But as the series goes on it gets less about the mystery of the week and more about the main character(s) being miserable, and lost a fair chunk of the joy2. (Netflix only has the first four of the ten(!) seasons).
In the Mouth of Madness — A (90s) rewatch of which I remembered almost nothing. Attempts to capture Lovecraftian dread, but the execution isn’t quite there. Some genuinely creepy moments but also too reliant on “repeated dream awakenings” and re-used footage. Amazing to think that John Carpenter did this a decade after The Thing, because the monster effects are a step down; less is more would have been so much better here3. But …. any schlock horror movie is elevated by David Warner & Jürgen Prochnow looks very anti-christ-like. Clever ending, but “ah, that’s clever” clever instead of a gut punch. I think it works better if you simply lop off the last few minutes.4
The Long Kiss Goodnight — (90s Rewatch, pt II). Shane Black makes another Shane Black movie. Action movie? Check! Partners who don’t like each other? Check! Banter? Christmastime? Checkity Check! Sadly this isn’t up the the heights that Lethal Weapon started, but its not bad.
Nobody Wants This (S2) — A reasonable ‘comfort food’ romcom/sitcom. Sometimes veers into cringe, but it understands that a romcom/sitcom must be funny (and heartwarming) so that both Mr. and Mrs. Tao will watch.
Under the Skin (book) — Read this after watching the movie (see Sep-Oct). Good, but in a very different way (books can show inner monologues, movies are visual). I think that the near silence of the movie was a good choice, but that necessitated changing the story to make it much more ambiguous. Note — Not for the squeamish.
Wick is Pain — Documentary on the John Wick Franchise. Reasonable if you liked the franchise. What impressed me was seeing stunts that I said “Obvious CGI” in the theater and then discovering that the CGI was only for the environment, not the stunt itself, which was real. (The building fall at the end of John Wick 2)
Maybe Not
Turned Off / Not Recommended
“Oh, Hi!” — I saw this recommended by Marginal Revolution. The plot is that a young couple go on a weekend vacation, find some bondage equipment, he gets tied up and (after sex) reveals that he doesn’t consider this a serious relationship, at which point she leaves him tied up and tries to convince him that she is girlfriend material. BUT nobody is sympathetic. She’s crazy. (It’s established that she considered stabbing her last boyfriend). “Leave him tied up” isn’t played for laughs, and isn’t funny. On the other hand, she’s right. You don’t go on a weekend trip alone after dating for four months and expect her to think it’s a fling. In Re: “Crazy girl” vs “Idiot Boy” I find both guilty. Turned off at the 30 minute mark (or less), tried to continue a few times. Failed. Now re-reading Marginal Revolution I realized that “better than expected retelling of…” isn’t necessarily an endorsement.5
Tenet — This finally showed up on streaming and … man; was Christopher Nolan trolling us the entire time6? “What if I just didn’t have a plot at all, but did as much cool stuff as possible?” Turned off before the hour mark; tried again and couldn’t get through another few minutes. It’s like a Bond movie with truly excellent set pieces and locations. (Off-brand Bond but not skimping on quality). Plus Time-travel special effects. But when you break it open it’s just Nelson Munz “Hah hah!”-ing you, the sucker audience.
OK, its an actual series of books on its own that started a few years ago, and the author’s father was formerly the Archbishop of Canterbury, but still … ︎
After finishing season 4 I realize that part of that was the requirements to switch the lead actors. ︎
Such as the people in an oil painting moving. If they never moved on camera and if you thought they had but weren’t sure, it would have been creepier. ︎
For example — Sam Neill’s character “sees” the carnage in the hallway (a ‘less is more shot’, where you see vague shadows and hear screams), realizes the door keeping him the sanitarium is busted … and then chooses to retreat to his room & close the door. ︎
But then I see it’s on his years best film list, so uh, whatever. ︎
No, mostly he’s pretty good. I guess this was just a misfire. ︎
The overall blog statistics are pretty meaningless – both last year and this year are skewed by WordPress sending my Farewell 2024 – Historical Fiction! post out to a bajillion people (from Dec 26 to Jan 8), which makes it easily the most popular post of each year (providing more than a fourth of my total views this year). If you factor that out, 2025 has been a good year on the blog, but slightly behind the (organic) record of 2023.
The posts doing particularly well have been the usual suspects, that is, the Most Anticipated Historical Board Games post in January, and the evergreen strategy posts for several games published over the last year. It was nice to see that a few of my research-intensive posts in the American Revolution and the Wallenstein series also did well.
Most of my readers come from the United States (also skewed by the Historical Fiction anomaly, but not entirely), as well as other Anglophone (UK, Canada, Australia) or European (Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, and France) countries. Especially the Dutch have made a leap up… maybe because of my post on the history of Amsterdam? Welkom, anyway.
New arrivals in the top 10 of the countries from which most views stem are Sweden and Poland in a joint Baltic effort.
If you compare views with population numbers, there are possibly no more loyal readers of this blog than the fine people of Ireland, closely followed by Hong Kong, whose views eclipse those of huge countries like Japan, Brazil, or India. The Irish have been devoted to history, board games, and history in board games for some years now, for which I am grateful. The Hongkongers are new in their excitement for the blog – welcome! If you are from Hong Kong, leave a comment below!
I can only speculate what brought people to this blog (but maybe you can enlighten me with a comment, especially if read this blog, but don’t comment often or ever). Here is, however, what I think was the finest which I published this year – as per usual, with six instead of three entries, and without crowning a winner. Let’s go!
Most of the history articles on this blog are about what people in the past did – the politicians, merchants, soldiers of times past. Yet I also like to dwell on what they thought, and thus I’m very happy to have written this post on the political philosophy of the American Revolution, its core value of liberty, and the promise and limitation of that idea. It was also an opportunity to engage with the still-compelling documents of the Revolution – Common Sense and the Declaration of Independence.
It’s been a wild year politically. Almost forgotten by now is the Great Tariff Rollercoaster of April 2025, in which the American federal government announced tariffs on imports from almost all other countries and then engaged in a flurry of raising, lowering, and holding off on them that made everyone’s head spin. By now, the 145% tariff on Chinese goods imported by US buyers is long gone, but at the time it seemed like an existential threat to US board game companies manufacturing their games in China (so, almost all of them), and given that the current US administration will still be in office for another three years, one worth revisiting.
This blog often gives me the opportunity to learn about new subjects. Wallenstein was one of them. I approached the post about his life with not more than a general knowledge about his role in the Thirty Years’ War… and then was sucked into a research rabbit hole in which I read over 2,000 pages about the guy. The result is a four-part series and the longest, most detailed board game assisted biography I have ever written about anyone.
…and this blog also allows me to re-visit topics and games with which I have engaged for years (and sometimes decades) now. Frederick II of Prussia is such a person, and Friedrich (Richard Sivél, Histogame) such a game. Reflecting on their insights on Frederick’s campaigns, the command and control exercised, and Frederick’s psychology was a delight.
Amsterdam is one of the iconic cities of the world. It is a symbol of art, commerce, and progress, and unique in its canal-structured urban layout. Unsurprisingly, these characteristics have also inspired board game designers. I have told Amsterdam’s 750-year history through the lens of the many board games set in Amsterdam – which gives a glimpse into what the city stands for in the popular imagination. As both this and my earlier Venice post were so much fun to write, I should do more city histories!
One of my brighter new ideas was to link historical board games to period music. Of course, that works particularly well from the 20th century on – the age of the music record. I started with an immersive playlist for your next game of Weimar (Matthias Cramer, Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx), full of everything that was hot at the time – from traditional songs to jazz, from movie tunes to workers’ songs. It will surely not remain the only such playlist.
And thus concludes the year 2025 on this blog. I hope you had as much fun reading it as I had writing.
I wish you all an excellent year 2026, full of joy, health, and success!
Anmelden
Specifically, my coworker, Susannah, coordinates with those publishers (aka localization partners). For example, when the Viticulture: Bordeaux Expansion English files were approved by our manufacturer in mid-2025, Susannah shared the source files for translation and the price per unit at different quantities with our localization partners. For any who decided to participate, Susannah kept them (and me) up to date with any potential revisions found during the translation process.
