Feedback on the game Racepack

["davidlhsl" <DavidLHsl@...>]

lurk=OFF

Today I had the opportunity to play the game Racepack with my brother. This game is 
designed by Michael and Stephen Shoessow.

I was particularly interested in this game, as my brother and I are fond of the board 
game Formula De. I had read the rules a couple of months ago. However, I didn't want 
to take up too much time rereading the rules today (nothing more boring than waiting 
for someone to study the rules), so I just briefly skimmed a few sentences and relied 
on memory. Returning home, I have reread the rules, and I only missed two rules in 
our play. The effect was marginal, but I think it's a testament to the clarity of the rules 
that I was able to recall the rules as closely as I did.

So the first feedback item is the rules themselves. The rules are very clearly written, 
provide many examples and illustrations, and do not have many ambiguities. The only 
problem I would see someone having is that Figure 2 illustrates the use of a strategy 
token for movement, but the first reference to the illustration is trying to explain the 
normal movement rules without mentioning the use of the tokens. Would a person be 
confused about the reference to the token? I wasn't, and I don't think most people 
would. In fact, when the use of tokens is mentioned later in the rules, it was able to 
reference Figure 2 again without needing a new illustration. So I wouldn't recommend 
changing this unless someone is confused by it.

My brother and I ran 3 cars apiece using the recommended track setup. Kudos for 
providing a recommended setup rather than simply telling the reader to make up their 
own configuration. It's nice to have a suggestion provided for first-time play, and 
players can create their own layout later. Perhaps a suggested layout for a 2-
piecepack track could be provided as well.

The mechanics of the game are rather ingenious. My favorite is the rule where the 
speed you select on your first movement segment does not have to relate to the 
speed you ended your last turn. This would've introduced needless complexity and 
record-keeping. The 3-segment turn is an inspired design as well.

Two other rules were invaluable in simplifying the gameplay: blocking rules (players 
are prevented from ramming into a blocking situation) and corner entry speed rule 
(speed of 1 or 2, with NO exceptions). By spelling out these two rules in concrete with 
no exceptions or loopholes, you eliminate complicated situations and possibilities for 
ambiguities. Too many times, introducing realism factors in game rules do more to 
confuse players and involve players in needless recordkeeping than enhance the 
actual gameplay.

Finally, I think the use of the coins is very well done. This really helps to provide a 
player with plenty of choices to think about during play, as well as provide a limited 
resource that a player must manage wisely to play well. Like Formula De, risk taking is 
unavoidable. There's enough luck in the game to prevent players from getting 
frustrated if they aren't leading, and I don't see any fixed set of turns that would break 
the game.

In the end, my game against my brother resulted in my lead car spinning out in the 
final turn, providing my brother the opportunity to pass me for the win. His cars came 
in 1st, 5th, 6th. Mine came in 2nd, 3rd, 4th.

My conclusion is that this is a very fun game with just enough luck to prevent players 
from giving up if they lose the lead. This is a very easy game to learn and teach to 
other players, while providing players plenty to think about during each turn. This is 
an excellent game, and I just wanted to pass my comments along in the hopes that 
the author will see this.

lurk=ON