I had a lot of fun playing Splendor. It was an extremely unique game play experience that I had not previously experienced.
Players formulated strategies, multiple turns in advance, lining up a series of purchases. It was common to hear another player’s sigh as you buy the card they hoped for.
The game did not take long to learn, only about 10 minutes.
One of the most frustrating aspects of the game was the coin and card limit. I understand the limitation to encourage players to make more purchases, but I saw players hoarding a lot.
I had fun winning by a landslide through the automatic noble acquisition (if you have the cards, you automatically receive a noble).
Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t?
We made the mistake of thinking that the number representing “prestige” on the card meant that you received 2 or three gems for the price of one card. After reading the rules, we realized that it was impossible.
I would add more money to the overall “economy”. I understand that the money limit is to force players to make purchases and not hoard, having more money to play around with would make games more technically complex.
Yes, I would play Splendor again. It offered a unique competitive experience in which players are always wondering if they’re the only person vying for the card they need.
The first act starts slow, as players are amassing wealth and trying to understand the game. Usually, an initial strategy forms, buy cheap cards in order to have enough to cover a more expensive one.
The game had many competitive aspects. We all shared the same coins, so we were forced to contribute to the economy while shutting others out. I often bought cards that my opponent were looking for to force them to revise their strategy.
The metaphor is similar to monopoly, which is capitalism. Strategic investments allows you to win in the long run.