Rowan Tree and Red Thread

Battle Line is good; it's a re-themed version of Schotten Totten. It's not entirely clear to me which of those is better as I haven't played ST, but I think there are purists who prefer the original. BL seemed like a good 2-player with some depth; slightly crunchier than Lost Cities, but not all that much crunchier.

Tempus is one of Martin Wallace's less well received designs, and I'm not sure why, really. I played it once, and liked it fine enough, but it never saw the table again. The component design is from the industry's early days of "hey, let's get these things manufactured in China", and it shows: the colours are not well selected, the components have an annoying texture. But those are niggles. I remember the game play being more or less fine, but having only played once, we really didn't see that there were any huge, yawning pits. I wouldn't mind trying it again, but then that's true of most Wallace games. I suspect that, really, it's for Wallace enthusiasts only, and there's lots of other, better, ways to spend your time if you're not one (Kramer's Hacienda, for example).

Incan Gold: the components are again of inferior quality. The cards are not coated and so get dinged up quickly; whether you get an edition that has all the required scoring bits is a matter of chance, it appears; I'm not fond of any game that asks you to fold a card in half as a matter of course (rather like a book that asks you to dog-ear the pages). Incan Gold is a re-do of Diamant, and is slightly cheaper and a has teensy addition to the rules. Frankly, I think you're way better off with Diamant, because the components are soooo much nicer. Nevertheless, either edition will give you a really good, quick game that kids will enjoy, probably from age 5 or 6 (with parental assistance) and up. Kids seem to really like "push your luck" games that don't require too much math.

Dominion I've played twice, and while it was fine, and objectively a good game, it's just not one that I'm all hot to add to my collection. I already owned Race For The Galaxy, and frankly, I think I liked RftG better (although there are clearly differences between the two games). If my shelves were barer, and I had more disposable income, I might be tempted to purchase Dominion, but as it is I'm happy (for the moment) not to own it: that said, I'd be happy to play it again, just someone else's copy). It certainly does have the feel of one of those games that a small group of gamers could glut on, thus explaining perhaps it's huge welcoming response. But it doesn't tap on my neural receptors in the same way it has done for some.

Dominion. Great game. A 20-30 minute filler with surprising depth and good replayability. Pretty much everyone I know likes it. It'd constantly be in my game bag if it weren't so big. I'm definitely picking up the expansion when it comes out this year.

Tempus. Not sure. As noted by Viktor, it got a poor reception. This was partially because it was really overhyped as a "civ lite" game for years before its release, and it's sorta not. I wanted to play it again last year, but couldn't get anyone else to try it. I probably want to get a copy of it for my collection before it goes out of print.

Incan Gold. A good to great game. Super light 10-15 minute filler, with some fun brinkmanship. It's about to be reprinted, so I think the cards may be getting an upgrade, but ah well. You'll be won over by the gems in any case, and it's not like the cards are getting held a lot.

Battle Line. I've only played this a few times, but I think it's an enjoyable Knizia.

On the issue of card quality in general: I don't worry about it. My Lost Cities has gotten played 50+ times, and the cards are really starting to wear. However, if I need to repurchase it, I definitely got my play out of the original.

Winless, I nonetheless count myself moderately satisfied to have improved considerably on the pasting I got at on last outing of both of those.

I definitely had less misery at TTR:tCG than in the first time out. I had excellent luck with top-decking (I draw several locos, and I think the only 'excess' coloured train card I had in my railyard was one I had in my initial draw, and played early on on the basis of "get rid of my initial loco with a stack of the colour I have most of before the fur really starts to fly"); I was more sinner than sinned-against on the bowbing front, this time out. Where I fell down on was being much too conservative on taking tickets: I could easily have made another large one, or a couple of small ones, if I had remembered what I'd played. Or even did what Sam did, by way of enlightened compromise on the "small children" rule, and counted played cards without actually looking.

It really is bowbing on a stick though: very frustrating to get a stack of cards "killed", typically representing two or three turns' "work", and have absolutely nothing to show for it. (It's pure psychology, of course, since the rational measure is relative progress, but making no absolute progress feels worse than merely apparently moving ahead, while falling behind everyone else (Puerto Rico syndrome).)

RftG turned out to be a semi-successful application of a semi-military strategy. I had a starting hand of lots of red, but getting it up and running from just a +1 was a little tricky. Well-off for production, but didn't really gel properly. All the high-value rebel worlds I couldn't conquer early on and had to burn were what I needed to see more of at the end, and vice versa. It was a little like the "Alien Military" combo I scored a bundle with at K2 with New Sparta, but less efficiently done, and without getting the right 6-pointers.

A lot more fun that playing Numberwang, certainly. (Gratuitous Mitchell and Webb reference.)