Rally Racers review.

["mschoessow" <mikeschoessow@...>]

   This is a play-test review of the game, Rally Racers, a game that 
is presently posted to the Rules In Progress file of this group. 
There were two of us playing the game, but we each controlled two 
cars, so there were a total of four cars in the race. In our limited 
experience, the game is better with four cars than with two. 

   I'm not going to start off the review by explaining the rules to 
the game (in part because I'm not entirely clear on them), so I 
suggest that anyone who is very interested in the details of this 
review but is not yet familiar with the game, go to the files 
section and take a look at the rules and graphics before reading 
further.

   To begin, let me say that I liked the game quite a bit, and the 
other player (my brother Steve) felt the same. The downside we 
experienced was not with the game, but with the rules clarity and 
organization. 

   There are lots of race games out there and I've played quite a 
few of them over the years (being a fan of car racing and race 
games), so I'm always pleasantly surprised when I come across 
something fresh that works well, and that was the case with Rally 
Racers. Let me start with a couple of examples. Usually in race 
games, designers try to avoid the problematic situation of one car 
blocking another in such a way as to cause a huge disadvantage for 
the car being blocked (this normally seems especially unrealistic 
when it happens on a long straight), but in Rally Racers, blocking 
is actually embraced and dealt with in an entirely new fashion; 
ramming is allowed. Also, cars that are about to be rammed may opt 
to avoid it by swerving out of the way (out of turn order) or in 
some cases, tapping the brakes, and dropping back a bit, or they may 
allow themselves to be bumped one space ahead along the track 
(sometimes a tactical advantage). The rules (which mandate that the 
car in last place goes first) lead to lots of blocking, and thus a 
fair amount of ramming. This, BTW,increases the amount of player 
interaction, which is a good thing in any game. A second innovation 
involves the way that movement is regulated. Players can increase 
their Movement Points by a given amount each turn, and these (along 
with handling points in some cases, can then be used for a variety 
of manuevers, including Cruise, Brake, Sideslip, Swerve, Rotate 
(change direction of movement), Jostle, and Ram. 

   Various tracks can be constructed with the tiles, but we stuck 
with the basic suggested large oval.

   Our biggest problems involved learning how to play the game. The 
rules need a lot of work to be clear, and at first we found things 
very confusing, especially regarding the various statements equating 
movement points and car speed. There needs to be a more complete 
description about the relationship between movement points, speed, 
and acceleration. I think the statement flatly equating movement 
points with speed is misleading. Some other issues that are not 
addressed adequately include the following. Is a player required to 
use up all his or her movement points each turn? When actions are 
taken that use up movement points, is the speed gauge (or maybe you 
call it the MP gauge---it's not labeled) lowered by that amount? 
More detals are required about building the cars before the race. 
Can players arrange the coins on their dashboards however they 
please? Is this done in sight of all other players, or is it done 
secretly, with all players revealing their configurations together? 
Player aid sheets (costs of various maneuvers, etc.) would be 
useful, perhaps combined with the dashboards (although admittedly 
after a few plyings these would probably not be necessary). The 
dashboards are overly fiddly. Here's what I suggest; make them a bit 
bigger. For the gauges, rather than rotating the coins in the center 
of the gauges, move them in an ARC, so the tick mark on the coin is 
always essentially touching the number it points to. This GREATLY 
reduces the sensitivity of the gauges and makes them less sensitive 
to jostling. It also opens up the possibility of embedding one gauge 
within another to save space. In general, the rules need to be re-
written and better organized in my opinion. I think I know how to 
play now (but I'm still not positive I have it right), but it took 
us the better part of an hour to figure it out the first time, and 
it's not that complicated a game. It's true that, now that I 
understand it, the rules seem more clear, but they really need to be 
clear the FIRST time a person reads them. 

  I think at one point, Stuart asked for name suggestions for the 
game. When playing it, at first I was uneasy with all the bumping 
and jostling of the cars, because it seemed unrealistic, but then it 
occured to me that with the oval track and large amounts of 
interaction, it reminded me of years past when I had attended dirt-
track stock car races, where they race older stock cars on 1/4 mile 
dirt ovals. There is typically LOTS of bumping, jostling, and even 
ramming sometimes in those races, and they can be very exciting! So 
perhaps the game name could reflect this. How about something like 
Dirt Track Derby, or Dirt Track Stock Cars, or Dirt Track Champion?? 
I know of no other race games that attempt to simulate these type of 
races, and this game does a good job; a nice distinction I would say.

   Lastly, I want to re-iterate that this is a game worthy of trying 
if you're a race game enthusiast, and that it plays well, includes 
lots of interaction, and has a flavor different than any other race 
game out there. I like it and recommend it. It plays very well just 
the way it is, but before it is added to piecepack.org, the rules 
should be re-organized.

-Mike