Flashback Friday - Eclipse
Love it or hate it? Do you still play it?
Eclipse designed by Touko Tahkokallio was, released in 2011.
It is a 4X game in which you must lead your civilization to prevail over the others. When it was initially released it was heralded as a streamlined and refined Twilight Imperium 3 "killer."
Michael Barnes wrote:
This game is amazing, it’s an innovative and highly evolved design that represents the very best of both American and European design concepts. So fucking what if there’s not some lame ass back story that tells you the history of the fish folks of Flingflarn or whatever. So what if there’s not piles of cards that tell you how to interact with other players. Tell your own stories and bring your own politics, and this game is just as bloody, ruthless, and violent as any classic DoaM game, but with a fraction of the bulk. It’s a bonus that the game also features an absolutely brilliant economic system that makes for lots of interesting decisions and tough choices. My Hellfire Club crew universally proclaimed TI3 dead after we played this.
On this site Eclipse was a divisive game with some people praising highly while others reviled it.
This was noted by Charlie Theel noted in his blog:
I know you're all groaning but Eclipse is one of my favorite games and I'm willing to stand by that until I die.
Which camp are you in. Love it or hate it? Do you still play it.
What I particularly appreciate is how easy it is to jump back into this game, especially for its weight. The player boards and user interface have all information intuitively displayed and it really leads you through its systems.
Really enjoyed my last play of this in May and am looking forward to the new edition.
charlest wrote:
Shellhead wrote: Is Eclipse the game where both the winner and loser in a combat get to draw vp chits? If so, that is precisely why I will never even try Eclipse.
It's based on what you KILL. You know, like other Euro games.
It resembles a participation trophy. A Euro way to keep a game artificially close.
Shellhead wrote:
charlest wrote:
Shellhead wrote: Is Eclipse the game where both the winner and loser in a combat get to draw vp chits? If so, that is precisely why I will never even try Eclipse.
It's based on what you KILL. You know, like other Euro games.
It resembles a participation trophy. A Euro way to keep a game artificially close.
That is definitely true, however, psychologically it creates a huge incentive for combat and interaction. My plays of Eclipse have included much more combat than my games of TI3/4.
So the comments about this have always struck me as a little off...I’d much rather play a game with lots of small, impactful battles than one 6 hour one where players amass a mountain of forces and wait to see who blinks first.
As far as the game itself, I like Eclipse a lot. Those missiles need to be fixed (and sort of are in the first expansion). And you can get hosed on your first few tile draws just like you are in ST: Ascendancy. But I'd play it again tonight if I could get a game going.
ETA: Mr. Barnes beat me to it.
The comparison originates in the Eclipse designer diaries, which shows that the designers of Eclipse also do not understand TI. They set out to address what they felt were “problems” with TI, not stopping consider why those systems were in place and how they contributed to the end result. What they delivered is a game that looks like TI on the table but doesn’t play anything like it.
And thank Crom that it doesn’t, because Eclipse sucks. It has a clever UI in its handling of its economy and a killer ship design system, but the game is dry, tedious, and offers nothing to get emotionally vested in. You’re competing against systems and mechanics in Eclipse more than anything else, while TI is a much more social, negotiation based game. It’s longer, but worth it.
More combat? Who cares, it’s still boring. I’ll take TI in that area as well, I’d much rather have it occur less often, plus it carries much more weight. Neither game has good combat.
I think I played Eclipse 15 times or so, so I *get* it. But I kept searching for what the buzz was all about, what I found is that it’s nothing but hype and drinking the Kool Aid. It fucking sucks.
It's been a while, but I remember players getting hosed by early, craptastic system draws - wild swings that massively affect build-up, like you can get in Star Trek Ascendancy.
dysjunct wrote: Tried playing the app version and decided that I couldn't be bothered after about 10 minutes.
I've only ever tried the app version as well. I probably got through 3 or 4 games before I gave up. I can't recall a game with a more jarring disconnect between how cool it LOOKS, and how boring it is to actually play. Playing it in real life has to just be excruciatingly dull.