You may also like…
Sale!
Embark on an epic adventure to bring humanity back from the brink of extinction in this standalone follow-up to the acclaimed Pandemic Legacy: Season 1. Black and Yellow Editions have variant covers game contents are the same.
Ajax2112
I just finished the campaign with my dad. I won't spoil the game out of respect, even though the game has shown no respect at all to its players. The gist is: You have no sense of end goal/direction till OVER half-way in. The game punishes you for literally everything you do. And I mean basically everything. Once you do figure out what you were supposed to do you have no time to do it. I could go on and on. It's actually awful. Truely the worst game (Board & Video games included) I have ever played. What you do need to know is, if you manage to put up with the game don't expect to win. Seriously. I don't think Matt and Rob could have designed a more forced-to-lose ending if they tried. I was actually pissed and yelling when I read how you are supposed to "win". Trust me, it's rigged. Hated the game all the way through, will never play it again. Oh and story? Your leaders left and it's up to you to stop racism.
143245
9/10 on exploration 2/10 on enjoyment. tldr: Season 1 was a much better game. My chief complaints are as such: A) Tying single use actions to end game scoring (e.g. searching cards and scratching that off) creates an incentive that hinders actual progress in the game given that you need to search to actually make progress in what you can do. If it looked like we were going to win, we would search to push us over the top. If we were going to lose and wanted to conserve the greatest potential to achieve victory conditions for a future game, we didn't. Mixing search results of "stuff I need long term" with "stuff I only can only use this game" doesn't help drive that incentive structure as it gives you no ability to make a value judgement on when you should search an area. There isn't anything that says "search anything and everything regardless of whether it wins you the game otherwise you're doomed in the second half of the year." B) There is zero tension, we either curbstomp the game and win before the 3rd epidemic, or we lose horribly by the time the second one comes up (which isn't long given that we're up to 8 now...). There is no "oh, we almost ran out of cards in the player deck and we were one turn away from winning." It's virtually always "we were not even close" or "we could have screwed off for another full round or two easily." In either game in June, we didn't build a single supply center and not for lack of trying. We didn't draw enough city cards to get to that point, two players had two turns and one player got exactly 1 turn that game... I literally don't care because I have no agency to drive the story forward. In educational research on feedback loops, this has too many amplifiers of bad results, not enough governors to return to an expected outcome. Why does the game pull you ahead and open new regions (and thus add cards to the player deck) when to succeed I need to find a specific card in the deck and search against it, but it won't say "if in June you haven't already found this, pull this card out of the player deck and scratch it off" to play catch-up? It just buries you. People can say "oh, pay close attention to the hints" but we're back to point number one. Unless you just happened to pick the right starting character combo and play exactly the optimum way of searching heavily instead of connecting lots of cities, it's entirely possible to lose the ONE card that will actually really help you into the player deck for game after game.
Allenthar
I like how the map slowly expands as you play, but I feel like the core mechanics of the game don't change enough to keep it exciting while playing the many games necessary to complete the campaign. If you really enjoy the core mechanics of Pandemic, this would probably be quite enjoyable. (Only completed ~6 games of the campaign)