Is Antike worth it?

I was over at one of the FLGS' the other day and I discovered that they had procured a copy of Antike. I had been perusing the GMT and FFG offerings (mmmm... Europe Engulfed), and there it was.

Now, I'm coming from the direction of a player who's played Civ and Advanced Civ; hell, if you look at my top 10 games list you'll see Advanced Civ is #1. I also have Mare Nostrum and Cities and Knights, but haven't played either while my wife has been on her Settlers of the Stone Age kick. (The dice gods don't like me very much right now, I'm afraid; I kept demanding rematches last weekend every time myself and a friend got our asses kicked in the game.)

I've been wondering if it's worth it to get Antike, since my first impression of the game is that I'd be better off playing Mare Nostrum instead.

--Mike L.

i've not played mare nostrum.

antike is a fake war game. i played it on tuesday for the first time, and tried to play it like a war game. i came 5th out of 6. the 6th placed guy tried to play it even more than a war game than i did. the player who came first played it efficiently, every move designed to earn a card.

the civ aspects of this game are neglible. it's a euro with the potential of combat, but in my game everyone had pretty similar army sizes, and seeing as every battle ends up as being 1 for 1 combat losses, it doesn't encourage fighting, especially with so many players.

it's ok. but i'd rather play a real war game.

Antike is kind of like a more Euro version of Mare Nostrum. The dice are gone and replaced with harsh 1 for 1 attrition. As moss_icon was saying, battling is so costly that you will avoid it unless it will give you a hero card. The trading is gone. To win you have to get a certain number of heroes like in Mare Nostrum. Each turn is kind of restrictive because of the rondel and you need to plan ahead a couple of turns. This makes it more of an efficiency based game than Mare Nostrum. I liked both games but I think you would be best trying before you buy both.

Between a reading of the rules and your advice, gang, I think I'm going to stay put with Mare Nostrum. Thanks a bunch.

--Mike L.

Antike sucks. I didn't even finish a whole game. Get Imperial if you are going to get a rondel game.

I like the game. After three plays I decided it was worth getting. Calling it a fake wargame isn't doing it justice though. It has war game and civ aspects but its really about pursuing several victory conditions simultaneously. You can dominate the board and still not win. In Antike the rondel works well letting you manipulate production if you're willing to pay the price. I like it every bit as much as Mare Nostrum and the games are similiar though Antike has a seperate and disticnt feel.

Steve"Pro Antike" Avery

Stephen Avery wrote:

but its really about pursuing several victory conditions simultaneously.

Exactly, which is why it's a bit boring!

hancock.tom wrote:

Antike sucks. I didn't even finish a whole game. Get Imperial if you are going to get a rondel game.

Meh. Apples and Oranges. They don't even use the rondel even remotely the same. Imperial's rondel has natural choke points where everyone clusters and one of the objects is to try to find a way to get the countries you are invested in to race around a bit faster without sacrificing board position. The action placement around the rondel isn't nearly as intentionally inconvenient as in Antike (which is a good thing for the latter.)

I still prefer Mare Nostrum to Antike, except that the endgame feels like its had a sledgehammer taken to it. A bit finer of a grain to distinguish placing rather than the arbitrary whim of the commerce director would improve MN greatly.

hancock.tom wrote:

Antike sucks. I didn't even finish a whole game. Get Imperial if you are going to get a rondel game.

I was about to write what Tom said. Funny thing, I don't think I ever finished a whole game either. The end game is awful. Imperial is a good game.

Really?! The end always seems to come too fast in our MAre Nostrum games. Usually becuase were too busy fighting and Egypt sneaks away with it...

Steve"CarthageRules"Avery

Heh. My group is running counter to popular opinion in that it loves Antike and hates Imperial...

I would really like to try Imperial someday. The whole you don't own a country only run it to the ground and jump ship is a cool mechanic to me.

Gary Sax wrote:

I would really like to try Imperial someday. The whole you don't own a country only run it to the ground and jump ship is a cool mechanic to me.

Sounds too much like "Jewish bankers" for me....

Stephen Avery - your avatar grosses me out. Normally I don't comment. But that is seriously whacked. You sicko.

Octavian wrote:

Meh. Apples and Oranges. They don't even use the rondel even remotely the same. Imperial's rondel has natural choke points where everyone clusters and one of the objects is to try to find a way to get the countries you are invested in to race around a bit faster without sacrificing board position. The action placement around the rondel isn't nearly as intentionally inconvenient as in Antike (which is a good thing for the latter.)
[/quote]

So you disagree with my statement that Imperial is a better game? Or you think you cannot compare antike and imperial because they use the rondel differently? Maybe I am just being dense today.

Imperial is a great game... and the jewish bankers comment is pretty funny. Somewhere on BGG there is a thread where some guy refused to play imperial because he was jewish and thought the game was racist.