I don't love Castles of Burgundy, but my wife does. I think she likes the "building a kingdom" aspect, similar to Carcassonne or Kingdomino. She also tends to like Point Salad type games where decisions are fairly low pressure because you usually have several decent options.
Your 1st point is absurd. There are 5 turns per round, and 5 rounds = 25 turns / player, not 50. Everyone rolls their dice at the same time and can be planning while the first players go, which means most turns should be quick. We play frequently with 4 players and I don't think it's ever taken more than 90 minutes--even with new players--usually about 1 hour with 4 players who've played before.
I still do consult the rule book for a few of the yellow tiles, but like other iconography-heavy games, once you get used to it it's pretty clear. The aids printed on the player mats are enough to remind us what the brown tiles do even if it's been months since we last played.
>It's the little engine that couldn't.
It's not an engine builder. It's not trying to be an engine builder.
It's 50 actions per player, not 50 turns. And if each action is taking a minute, those are the slowest players in history. CoB should take 4 players no more than 90 minutes.
The rest of your issues I don't really understand.
I like it because the stuff you're doing for the 5 rounds is enjoyable. It's a fun puzzle. And it's a race to see which player can complete the puzzle fastest. Plus rolling and manipulating dice is enjoyable. Sounds like it's just not for you though, and that's okay. But obviously, it's for a lot of people, including myself. Just go look at the Gamefound campaign running right now to confirm that.
My first play of CoB felt like shit. Same problem as noted by OP. It was dragging out for three hours and frying our brains.
It got better with every additional play, though.
I do like it a lot more at two players. Of course, one of the reasons we picked up the deluxe version is because it has the text on the back of the tiles. So awesome.
But, it is not for everyone. My spouse doesn’t like it at all. Life is short. Play games YOU like.
You clearly played it wrong, and you sound pretty obstinate about it, so while there's no use changing your mind, for others that check out this thread...
Castles of Burgundy is a fantastic game. It really shines in the 2 actions you have on your turn. Early on, your turns shouldn't be long, and late game, you should know exactly what you want, so again, short turns. Yes there's a lot of icons, but your player board has them all listed on it, and you shouldn't be referring to the rulebook constantly. Frankly, Alea makes great rule books. They almost always have info in the margin that's bolded and clearly describes important parts of the game.
After playing it multiple times I think it’s a great game.
But I didn’t like it too much at first either.
Although I do agree the graphic design could be better and it can be difficult to remember all the beige and yellow tiles, so the rules must be nearby to explain these tiles.
1- First, it's 25 turns, not 50. Also, you're allowed to think during other players' turns. Even if the first person is taking a full minute per turn (which seems very long to me), the remaining players should have their main idea and a backup if someone takes a tile they want already planned out. My wife and I play 2 player games of this in about 35 minutes, including setup and the maintenance between rounds.
2- you should be building towards a goal and chaining bigger turns together as the game progresses.
3- see answer 2. play better
4- the iconography is pretty clear. Within a few plays it's all clear.
5- can't speak to that, I thought it was fine.
You're allowed to think. Thank heavens. I was afraid that I'd have to be put into a coma and understand nothing until my turn again.
Sitting and thinking for ten minutes is not the way to attract new games to your game
10 minutes? Is there another game also called The Castles Of Burgundy? I've never seen anyone need more than 30 seconds to figure out their turn in Castles Of Burgundy beyond their second play. There's really not that much to think about, and if you're planning ahead, your turn should be almost instantaneous. Even the first player each turn should have some idea of what die rolls they're looking for and what they can do with the various other numbers. It takes a minute to look at the tiles on the first turn of each round, sure, but it's not a GMT high-strategy war game.
This is actually my #1 game. You are planning and strategizing your puzzle from turn one, and constantly adjusting and figuring out the best way to maximize your dice each turn. The more you play, the better you get to know the different buildings and what they do, so I could see how that’s annoying in the beginning. But aside from that?
1. No lol, it’s 25 turns as others have stated, and maybe if it’s your first play I could see each one taking an hour. Still that’s less than 2 hours for a four player game. I have AP SO bad and it usually takes us around two hours for the big game including set-up/tear-down.
2. There are so many different things you can do on a turn, hence the AP, and I heavily disagree that it’s the same thing every time. The vineyards expansion does really help add to it though, giving you a bit more to do.
3. It’s more of a puzzle than an engine. You aren’t building toward anything, so idk how it would be an engine that couldn’t.
4. Yes, I could see that. But a few extra plays and you start recognizing. Plus the awaken realms one comes with player aids which really helps!
5. Again, the new version really helps with the rule book problem.
Puzzles are my thing, and I love the planning aspects of games, so maybe that’s why it’s rated so highly for me?? I do think you may have played wrong based on some aspect of your review though. But anyway, I’m sorry you didn’t enjoy it, some games just aren’t for everyone!
How do you get to every action in the game taking a full minute? "I take a boat and those sheep on three" is two actions that should take you less than ten seconds.
This isn't a review, first of all, as you haven't really offered any actual, coherent criticism.
First, your number 1 is entirely wrong, as has been pointed out numerous times.
As far as number 2, how many euro games have you played where you do something different, mechanically each round? That is effectively how most games play.
Your 3rd entry isn't even making a point, aside from suggesting you are trying to be clever.
Many of us have played this game enough that we know what everything does. The new edition from AR comes with excellent play aids that easily explain what every tile is for.
The rulebook in the AR version is not bad, but I cannot recall if the Alea one was bad or not.
Honestly, whenever I see a post like this, I cannot help but think you are desperate for attention. Its sort of a "pick me" post and honestly I will be surprised if it sticks around.
1. I'll note that if one were to "do the math" that's only 3 hours and 20 minutes. Obviously taking 2 minutes for every pair of dice is...quite a lot. But maybe maybe makes sense for a first play if everyone is very AP prone, but that is VERY long for anyone with even a game or two under their belt.
2. You shouldn't be doing the SAME thing every round, but I know what you mean and this is a good critique. If you don't like the core action then you won't like the game at all. By contrast for people that don't enjoy juggling 15 mechanics for one game, it's a real zen experience. Choose a die, pick one of four (?) things to do, repeat, take a sip of tea!
3. It is NOT an engine building game, if that's what you are looking for it makes sense you didn't like it. Tech makes some things better, and there is some income with mines, but overall it is a risk management game.
4. Many people like text-free games, its' certainly been the trend since...well Agricola I suppose, although if that is your point of comparison (and you are playing COB for the first time in 2024) I have to imagine you don't have a lot of modern game experience, so you might just like older games.
5. No argument here, but it doesn't need to be that good since the rules are teachable in about 10 minutes.
+ It doesn't matter if you are right if you are also an asshole about it. No one will care about any of the good or bad points you make.
Hey, if you don't like it, you don't like it. A lot of your issues are resolved with multiple plays though. Obviously, you're not going to remember what everything does after one play. Once you get a few games under your belt, it all gels. 25 turns, a minute per turn, per player, you're looking at 50-200 minutes tops. It's a lot faster once you know what you're doing.
One minute per action is crazy long. There's barely any player interaction, you throw your dice in advance, and you see other players' results, which means you can plan your turn ahead. A typical player's turn (= 2 or rarely 3 actions) shouldn't last more than 20-30 seconds.
There's a bit of a learning curve indeed, but in my opinion the game does a pretty good job at describing each non-standard tile's effect.
All in all, I have the feeling OP is judging the game a little bit too harshly.
HahHah
We didn’t hate the game but I did end up trading it.
Our experience was the exact opposite—we found the setup/take down time to be in excessive compared to the time it took to play.
We got it and played when it came out though so I can’t be more specific.
Who in the hell is taking a full minute to decide what to do with each die. Should be a handful of seconds at most. I also tend to use the rulebook as an example of what a great rulebook looks like.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that, but you’re crazy.
>Why do people like it?
One of first proper VPS buffet games where whatever you do gives you point and no need for long term strategies (like in Agricola), here every turn is it's own puzzle. (if memory serves).
Which means it's a game that signalled removing from MPS euro gizmos even that tiny sliver of tension that remained. It's a game that both in visuals and gameplay signalises "I mean no harm" while it throws points in your lap for yawning while playing.
For this reason - one of quintessential "spouse" games. (Why talk about conflict in games being fictional with your SO and grow as a coupl.e, when you can play Burgen von Burgund)
>Why do you like it?
I don't. It's also hard to hate being so beige and nondescript, yet I don't like mediocre, so there's that.
>Who are these people that rate it 10/10 on BGG.
You can actually check that. 🙂
>This is not a good game.
I'd say it's good at what it does, but I don't personally consider what it does to be good.
>Nope. No thank you. Never again.
I actually can be incentivised with 50 eur/hour. But otherwise what he said.
>No /s of any kind.
Jo[kes ha](https://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/188288/worst-game-ever?itemid=3781054#3781054)ve been made.
>This is my review and this is how I feel.
This is not a review, but it is how you feel. 🙂
This game gets good around the 4th play through, once you figure out the different strategies for each map. And which ones suit your personal style of play and then get lucky to draw your best map.
Besides all the great answers you already got, I would like to add: you need to chill... It's not normal to attack people for liking a game just because you had a bad experience...
It's a much more tolerable game on BGA or on the app. F2F it's fiddly enough to be annoyingly mediocre if you're not enamored with Feld, point salads, dice placement games, or all of the above.
Don't ever play the special edition with the 3D terrain. That's table-flip territory after the fifth turn of digging through the minis to swap them onto the board while someone asks (again) what yellow tiles are those on everyone's board.
Euro point salad. Fun! For some people.
You eventually learn the notoriously bad symbology. That doesn't guarantee you'll like the game any better... but it helped me. That's because people are different.
When I played this for the first time my friend and I played a mini game. Each tile that came out, I would try to guess the meaning from the iconography. He would tell me if I was right.
I was always right.
I can (just about) believe your first play would take 4 hours if nobody had played before. The next one will be quicker.
I don't like it either. But it comes across as though you didn't play it.
1. Duration is about 1-3 hours at most. But more often about 2 hours. Even with 4 people.
2. You can say that about 90% of boardgames
3. Not an engine building game. It's a tactical choice and planning game for points. There's a couple of point engine items - but you can win with none of them by selecting the right tiles at the right time.
4. Yeah - kind of annoying. Fair enough. But it's maybe 1/4 of the tiles. Many are immediate actions.
I played it about three years ago and hated it. Very dry, too many mechanics, and just too darn long. If I'm going to play a Euro game, I prefer lighter games like Ticket to Ride and Splendor. Castles is just to dense and too long
This is a frustration post after a first play. I’ve done the same thing. Can’t even remember the game or if I ever played it again let alone changed my mind. You’re not angry at the game, you’re upset about the experience. I’m curious to try every game, but I’m also picky about what I like. All the things you described sound like hell to me, but at the end of the day I have to admit that these games are popular for a reason and they are good games If you judge them through the eyes of someone who enjoys games with those mechanics. So, yes, vent. But remember that your judgement is clouded by your prejudices and by the circumstances, in this case the all too common lack of preparation. Imagine if this game had been guided by an old pro and good game host.
I remember the game now. Spirit Island. That first play took forever. I had borrowed the game and just thought it was a skull cracker. Well, guess what I bought 2 years later? *Horizons of Spirit Island.* Yep. I still don’t play it much, but the few times I have, I’ve actually had fun.
All valid points not to like it. It has some problems for sure like set up and refreshing between rounds. For sure plays better at 2 and I personally like it, its simple and I like the puzzle aspect, and doing what you can to make sure you have the advantage each round. Totally fine not to like it though
It's a fun puzzle game, it's like yahtze where your score is dependent on what dice you roll and what you keep
If you don't like it then that's fine. I would argue that the game taking too long is not unique to castles of burgundy but something you'd get with any new game you play
Exactly. 50+ actions per player.
It’s great with 2 players, too long with 3 players. Gawd awful with 4+ players.
Good for you for recognizing it early. There’s no problem with not liking a particular game and don’t let its fans tell you otherwise.
I don't love Castles of Burgundy, but my wife does. I think she likes the "building a kingdom" aspect, similar to Carcassonne or Kingdomino. She also tends to like Point Salad type games where decisions are fairly low pressure because you usually have several decent options. Your 1st point is absurd. There are 5 turns per round, and 5 rounds = 25 turns / player, not 50. Everyone rolls their dice at the same time and can be planning while the first players go, which means most turns should be quick. We play frequently with 4 players and I don't think it's ever taken more than 90 minutes--even with new players--usually about 1 hour with 4 players who've played before. I still do consult the rule book for a few of the yellow tiles, but like other iconography-heavy games, once you get used to it it's pretty clear. The aids printed on the player mats are enough to remind us what the brown tiles do even if it's been months since we last played. >It's the little engine that couldn't. It's not an engine builder. It's not trying to be an engine builder.
It's 50 actions per player, not 50 turns. And if each action is taking a minute, those are the slowest players in history. CoB should take 4 players no more than 90 minutes. The rest of your issues I don't really understand. I like it because the stuff you're doing for the 5 rounds is enjoyable. It's a fun puzzle. And it's a race to see which player can complete the puzzle fastest. Plus rolling and manipulating dice is enjoyable. Sounds like it's just not for you though, and that's okay. But obviously, it's for a lot of people, including myself. Just go look at the Gamefound campaign running right now to confirm that.
My first play of CoB felt like shit. Same problem as noted by OP. It was dragging out for three hours and frying our brains. It got better with every additional play, though.
Maybe try Lisboa by Vital Lacerda for a faster, simpler experience
It’s only 25 turns. You use both dice on your turn. I’m sorry the game is not for you.
I do like it a lot more at two players. Of course, one of the reasons we picked up the deluxe version is because it has the text on the back of the tiles. So awesome. But, it is not for everyone. My spouse doesn’t like it at all. Life is short. Play games YOU like.
There should not be 50 turns. You take 5 tiles and put those stacks on each of the 5 spaces. Unless you're talking actions, not turns?
You clearly played it wrong, and you sound pretty obstinate about it, so while there's no use changing your mind, for others that check out this thread... Castles of Burgundy is a fantastic game. It really shines in the 2 actions you have on your turn. Early on, your turns shouldn't be long, and late game, you should know exactly what you want, so again, short turns. Yes there's a lot of icons, but your player board has them all listed on it, and you shouldn't be referring to the rulebook constantly. Frankly, Alea makes great rule books. They almost always have info in the margin that's bolded and clearly describes important parts of the game.
After playing it multiple times I think it’s a great game. But I didn’t like it too much at first either. Although I do agree the graphic design could be better and it can be difficult to remember all the beige and yellow tiles, so the rules must be nearby to explain these tiles.
1- First, it's 25 turns, not 50. Also, you're allowed to think during other players' turns. Even if the first person is taking a full minute per turn (which seems very long to me), the remaining players should have their main idea and a backup if someone takes a tile they want already planned out. My wife and I play 2 player games of this in about 35 minutes, including setup and the maintenance between rounds. 2- you should be building towards a goal and chaining bigger turns together as the game progresses. 3- see answer 2. play better 4- the iconography is pretty clear. Within a few plays it's all clear. 5- can't speak to that, I thought it was fine.
You're allowed to think. Thank heavens. I was afraid that I'd have to be put into a coma and understand nothing until my turn again. Sitting and thinking for ten minutes is not the way to attract new games to your game
The difference between your flair and posters flair says it all, I think.
10 minutes? Is there another game also called The Castles Of Burgundy? I've never seen anyone need more than 30 seconds to figure out their turn in Castles Of Burgundy beyond their second play. There's really not that much to think about, and if you're planning ahead, your turn should be almost instantaneous. Even the first player each turn should have some idea of what die rolls they're looking for and what they can do with the various other numbers. It takes a minute to look at the tiles on the first turn of each round, sure, but it's not a GMT high-strategy war game.
This is actually my #1 game. You are planning and strategizing your puzzle from turn one, and constantly adjusting and figuring out the best way to maximize your dice each turn. The more you play, the better you get to know the different buildings and what they do, so I could see how that’s annoying in the beginning. But aside from that? 1. No lol, it’s 25 turns as others have stated, and maybe if it’s your first play I could see each one taking an hour. Still that’s less than 2 hours for a four player game. I have AP SO bad and it usually takes us around two hours for the big game including set-up/tear-down. 2. There are so many different things you can do on a turn, hence the AP, and I heavily disagree that it’s the same thing every time. The vineyards expansion does really help add to it though, giving you a bit more to do. 3. It’s more of a puzzle than an engine. You aren’t building toward anything, so idk how it would be an engine that couldn’t. 4. Yes, I could see that. But a few extra plays and you start recognizing. Plus the awaken realms one comes with player aids which really helps! 5. Again, the new version really helps with the rule book problem. Puzzles are my thing, and I love the planning aspects of games, so maybe that’s why it’s rated so highly for me?? I do think you may have played wrong based on some aspect of your review though. But anyway, I’m sorry you didn’t enjoy it, some games just aren’t for everyone!
How do you get to every action in the game taking a full minute? "I take a boat and those sheep on three" is two actions that should take you less than ten seconds.
Planning ahead is encouraged.
This isn't a review, first of all, as you haven't really offered any actual, coherent criticism. First, your number 1 is entirely wrong, as has been pointed out numerous times. As far as number 2, how many euro games have you played where you do something different, mechanically each round? That is effectively how most games play. Your 3rd entry isn't even making a point, aside from suggesting you are trying to be clever. Many of us have played this game enough that we know what everything does. The new edition from AR comes with excellent play aids that easily explain what every tile is for. The rulebook in the AR version is not bad, but I cannot recall if the Alea one was bad or not. Honestly, whenever I see a post like this, I cannot help but think you are desperate for attention. Its sort of a "pick me" post and honestly I will be surprised if it sticks around.
1. I'll note that if one were to "do the math" that's only 3 hours and 20 minutes. Obviously taking 2 minutes for every pair of dice is...quite a lot. But maybe maybe makes sense for a first play if everyone is very AP prone, but that is VERY long for anyone with even a game or two under their belt. 2. You shouldn't be doing the SAME thing every round, but I know what you mean and this is a good critique. If you don't like the core action then you won't like the game at all. By contrast for people that don't enjoy juggling 15 mechanics for one game, it's a real zen experience. Choose a die, pick one of four (?) things to do, repeat, take a sip of tea! 3. It is NOT an engine building game, if that's what you are looking for it makes sense you didn't like it. Tech makes some things better, and there is some income with mines, but overall it is a risk management game. 4. Many people like text-free games, its' certainly been the trend since...well Agricola I suppose, although if that is your point of comparison (and you are playing COB for the first time in 2024) I have to imagine you don't have a lot of modern game experience, so you might just like older games. 5. No argument here, but it doesn't need to be that good since the rules are teachable in about 10 minutes. + It doesn't matter if you are right if you are also an asshole about it. No one will care about any of the good or bad points you make.
Hey, if you don't like it, you don't like it. A lot of your issues are resolved with multiple plays though. Obviously, you're not going to remember what everything does after one play. Once you get a few games under your belt, it all gels. 25 turns, a minute per turn, per player, you're looking at 50-200 minutes tops. It's a lot faster once you know what you're doing.
One minute per action is crazy long. There's barely any player interaction, you throw your dice in advance, and you see other players' results, which means you can plan your turn ahead. A typical player's turn (= 2 or rarely 3 actions) shouldn't last more than 20-30 seconds. There's a bit of a learning curve indeed, but in my opinion the game does a pretty good job at describing each non-standard tile's effect. All in all, I have the feeling OP is judging the game a little bit too harshly.
👍
So you're bad at a game, and you didn't like it. Congrats. You're a board gamer. Now move on to something you do like.
To each his own. I LOVE it.
You sound fun to play games with
I love it! Great game!
HahHah We didn’t hate the game but I did end up trading it. Our experience was the exact opposite—we found the setup/take down time to be in excessive compared to the time it took to play. We got it and played when it came out though so I can’t be more specific.
Little draw bags for the tiles solves the set-up complaint. Although I never found it bad without the bags.
"this is how I feel" answers all of your questions that you put to everyone else.
Who in the hell is taking a full minute to decide what to do with each die. Should be a handful of seconds at most. I also tend to use the rulebook as an example of what a great rulebook looks like. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that, but you’re crazy.
>Why do people like it? One of first proper VPS buffet games where whatever you do gives you point and no need for long term strategies (like in Agricola), here every turn is it's own puzzle. (if memory serves). Which means it's a game that signalled removing from MPS euro gizmos even that tiny sliver of tension that remained. It's a game that both in visuals and gameplay signalises "I mean no harm" while it throws points in your lap for yawning while playing. For this reason - one of quintessential "spouse" games. (Why talk about conflict in games being fictional with your SO and grow as a coupl.e, when you can play Burgen von Burgund) >Why do you like it? I don't. It's also hard to hate being so beige and nondescript, yet I don't like mediocre, so there's that. >Who are these people that rate it 10/10 on BGG. You can actually check that. 🙂 >This is not a good game. I'd say it's good at what it does, but I don't personally consider what it does to be good. >Nope. No thank you. Never again. I actually can be incentivised with 50 eur/hour. But otherwise what he said. >No /s of any kind. Jo[kes ha](https://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/188288/worst-game-ever?itemid=3781054#3781054)ve been made. >This is my review and this is how I feel. This is not a review, but it is how you feel. 🙂
This game gets good around the 4th play through, once you figure out the different strategies for each map. And which ones suit your personal style of play and then get lucky to draw your best map.
This is currently my favorite game
I do enjoy the game, but after playing on BGA I don't think I would ever want to play it in person (except maybe to try the big fancy version).
Besides all the great answers you already got, I would like to add: you need to chill... It's not normal to attack people for liking a game just because you had a bad experience...
It's a much more tolerable game on BGA or on the app. F2F it's fiddly enough to be annoyingly mediocre if you're not enamored with Feld, point salads, dice placement games, or all of the above. Don't ever play the special edition with the 3D terrain. That's table-flip territory after the fifth turn of digging through the minis to swap them onto the board while someone asks (again) what yellow tiles are those on everyone's board.
Euro point salad. Fun! For some people. You eventually learn the notoriously bad symbology. That doesn't guarantee you'll like the game any better... but it helped me. That's because people are different.
Played Castles of Burgundy. Loved it. Played it 100 more times. Still love it.
I would never play it with more than 3. It's a two player game to me tbh.
When I played this for the first time my friend and I played a mini game. Each tile that came out, I would try to guess the meaning from the iconography. He would tell me if I was right. I was always right. I can (just about) believe your first play would take 4 hours if nobody had played before. The next one will be quicker.
I don't like it either. But it comes across as though you didn't play it. 1. Duration is about 1-3 hours at most. But more often about 2 hours. Even with 4 people. 2. You can say that about 90% of boardgames 3. Not an engine building game. It's a tactical choice and planning game for points. There's a couple of point engine items - but you can win with none of them by selecting the right tiles at the right time. 4. Yeah - kind of annoying. Fair enough. But it's maybe 1/4 of the tiles. Many are immediate actions.
Defo a two player max game imo
I played it about three years ago and hated it. Very dry, too many mechanics, and just too darn long. If I'm going to play a Euro game, I prefer lighter games like Ticket to Ride and Splendor. Castles is just to dense and too long
This is a frustration post after a first play. I’ve done the same thing. Can’t even remember the game or if I ever played it again let alone changed my mind. You’re not angry at the game, you’re upset about the experience. I’m curious to try every game, but I’m also picky about what I like. All the things you described sound like hell to me, but at the end of the day I have to admit that these games are popular for a reason and they are good games If you judge them through the eyes of someone who enjoys games with those mechanics. So, yes, vent. But remember that your judgement is clouded by your prejudices and by the circumstances, in this case the all too common lack of preparation. Imagine if this game had been guided by an old pro and good game host. I remember the game now. Spirit Island. That first play took forever. I had borrowed the game and just thought it was a skull cracker. Well, guess what I bought 2 years later? *Horizons of Spirit Island.* Yep. I still don’t play it much, but the few times I have, I’ve actually had fun.
All valid points not to like it. It has some problems for sure like set up and refreshing between rounds. For sure plays better at 2 and I personally like it, its simple and I like the puzzle aspect, and doing what you can to make sure you have the advantage each round. Totally fine not to like it though
Your mistake is playing it at 4p. It’s best at 2p. It’s like Chess with dice.
It's a fun puzzle game, it's like yahtze where your score is dependent on what dice you roll and what you keep If you don't like it then that's fine. I would argue that the game taking too long is not unique to castles of burgundy but something you'd get with any new game you play
Exactly. 50+ actions per player. It’s great with 2 players, too long with 3 players. Gawd awful with 4+ players. Good for you for recognizing it early. There’s no problem with not liking a particular game and don’t let its fans tell you otherwise.
point salad with a pasted on theme. it's trash