Inspiration and Calculation: A Review of Innovation

It’s worth noting that this review is of the 2011 Iello version. As well as introducing some great artwork, the Iello edition changes a large amount of terminology from the Asmadi edition. Here, I use exclusively the Iello terminology.

At half an hour in, we’re roughly midway through a two-player game of Innovation, a tableaux-building civilization game by Carl Chudyk, and I’m well behind my opponent. I have less influence, have achieved fewer dominations, and have fewer resources.

It comes to my turn. I could try drawing a card and putting it into play; it might be something I could use in the next turn. But there’s a fair chance the card will be useless to me, given that I lack resources to fuel card effects.

Also, next turn is an age away when my opponent has a potent and versatile tableau in front of her. Her civilization is developing fast.

So I look at the cards I have in play, and their effects. There has to be something there to exploit.

A tableau in Innovation

My tableau. Cards in Innovation are colour-coded, with each colour following a rough theme. For instance, red cards are typically aggressive and militaristic. The pictures around the edges represent a player’s resources. Here, for instance, the player has six light bulbs in the Renaissance. I suppose the icon symbolizes invention as a resource, but it’s a jarring symbol on earlier cards in the game

In Innovation, there are two types actions offered by cards, referred to as dogmas. The first type, supremacy dogmas, affect any opponent with less of a particular resource than the player issuing the dogma. However, trees are the only resource of which I have more than my opponent, and none of my active cards utilizes trees.

The second type of dogma is the cooperative dogma. All players can take advantage of these if they have at least as many of the required resource as the active player. If a player in addition to the active player uses one of these dogmas, then the active player is able to draw an extra card by way of a bonus. Naturally, in a two-player game, it is often best to use cooperative dogmas when holding the majority of a resource, because then you alone can employ the action.

However, this is not always true.

I have Experimentation among my cards. It has a cooperative dogma, which insists that the affected players draw and put into play a card from the fifth era (cards become progressively stronger in each era, reflecting human progress). There is, though, only one card left in the fifth pile. My opponent, who must carry out the dogma first, will take this, meaning that when I use the dogma, I draw and put into play a card from the sixth era instead.

It’s something of a risk, of course: since my opponent has more resources, she will most probably be able to utilize any dogma provided by the card she receives. It’s the kind of speculative experiment that befits a card named ‘Experimentation’ (Other cards also suit their titles in neat, sometimes subtle ways: for instance, Gunpowder effectively knocks down cards with the castle resource, while Globalization later does the same to trees).

My opponent draws, and receives Coal. It’s by no means a bad card, but it replaces Pirate Code among her active cards. And she’s been attacking me with Pirate Code relentlessly since she drew it. I’m glad to see it replaced.

I get Vaccination. It has a supremacy dogma requiring trees. It’s a great result – I can start to attack back, at last. And, because my opponent had to use this dogma, I get another draw. I pull Emancipation. It won’t be immediately useful (I don’t have the resources to exploit it at the moment), but nonetheless I’ll smile and try to kid my opponent that it was exactly the card for which I’d been hoping.

A player mat in Innovation

A player mat. Like Chudyk’s earlier card game, Glory to Rome, cards may, at certain times, be slipped under a player mat to denote the state of a player’s dominion. In Innovation, those on the left represent a player’s influence. Here, the player has ten influence points (three points from one third era card, four from two second era cards, and three from three first era cards). That influence has been used to dominate the first and second eras, denoted by the cards slipped under the right-hand side of the board (the first era may be dominated when a player has five influence points and an active card from at least the first era, the second with ten points and at a card from at least the second era active, and so on). In addition, the military domain has been dominated, through utilizing the second era card, Construction. Enough dominations (how many depends on the number of players), and a player wins

I guess the point is Innovation clicks with me, and with its own title, because it allows for innovation. Opportunities for gaining extra value from a card arise and recede quickly (a recycling action can return cards to the general supply), and spotting these chances is key in playing Innovation well.

While the effect of something like Experimentation might initially appear invariable, it isn’t. Because the supply of cards from any given era can be depleted, its strength can sometimes grow. Similarly, it’s not infrequent that its first era analogue, Sailing (‘Draw and put into play a 1’) can be used, sometimes, to pull cards from the third or fourth eras.

Moreover, in that a player has two actions per turn, combinations can sometimes be exploited. Imagine using one action to recycle a first era card, thereby restarting its supply pile, then using Sailing to force an opponent to take, and activate, the particular outdated card in question (thereby replacing a better card from a later era).

However, while this kind of potential for exploiting flashes of inspiration during brief windows of opportunity may be a hallmark of a fine card game  – which this is, it is a somewhat strange partner to the game’s epoch-spanning civilization-building theme. In that your tableau is unstable, you can lose the benefit of a technology as quickly as you gain it. It’s thematically strange that when you cover Sailing with another green card, you lose that power. It’s not how civilizations advance and weakens immersion in the game.

Printing Press, Innovation

To reveal more resources, piles of cards can be splayed through some dogmas, such as the second one on Printing Press, seen above

Moreover, the volatility of each tableau means that calculating the level of resources you and your opponents possess is a chore which must be repeated many, many times in a single game. And though certain resources are only available on cards of certain periods – for instance, castles only appear on cards from the first three eras – this does not mean they become entirely irrelevant later in the game. One reason is that  a player may dominate the military domain when he or she has three of each resource visible in his or her zone – meaning castles may stay a concern long after their real power fades. It’s the kind of game where better players must be not only quick-thinking, but also more attentive accountants. Because of these bureaucratic elements, Innovation is best played with two, or perhaps three players. With every player added, book-keeping escalates and control diminishes.

Nevertheless, Innovation is in general a tremendously likeable, multi-dimensional and nuanced game. In particular, the potential for cards to surpass the overt limits of their power allows for splendidly nifty moments, and gives a pleasing reward for quick-wittedness. Though the moment-by-moment gameplay of Innovation fits uncomfortably with the game’s theme in certain respects, control does ebb and flow between players in a way that reproduces in miniature the swoops of history. In moments of inspiration, it is possible to claw back from bleak situations, as above. What is more (as W. Eric Martin’s review after nearly two hundred plays argues) this potential for innovative play stays, even after a great number of plays.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Inspiration and Calculation: A Review of Innovation

  1. Hi, Mark! Thanks for the callout of my Innovation review on BGG. My first response is to point out that you have six bulbs, not five, in the first image.

    Second, I find this review somewhat confusing as I’ve never played on the IELLO version of Innovation and find myself having to translate everything into the terms used by Asmadi Games. You recycle cards? The military domain? It’s like another language – and yet not.

    Third, I’m not much of a theme guy, but I do find the subtle intertwining of theme with card power amusing. Coal can stripmine your holdings; with Sailing, you discover something unexpected; and so forth. I suppose you can view the loss of Sailing as unthematic and not immersive, as you describe above, but in some ways I think this represents a culture’s changing focus as the years pass. Sure, the U.S. still has huge fleets and we import an unimaginable number of goods in containers each day, but it’s not something that most people think about. Instead we’re consumed with software and robotics, with all the other stuff (chemistry, printing press, antibiotics, etc.) doing their thing in the background.

    • Thank you for the spotting the bulb miscount. Genuinely. I can see if someone hadn’t played the game, it could be pretty confusing (since one of the bulbs is on a card revealed by splaying, after all).

      I’m not sure why IELLO changed so much of the game’s terminology. In some places I understand it to have introduced ambiguity which wasn’t in the Asmadi version (though I haven’t seen that edition first-hand to confirm). For instance, Translation in the IELLO version states ‘You may put into play all the cards from your Influence.’ Though we guessed this would be either or all or none (as opposed to some), I had to resort to BGG for clarification (and through doing so discovered just how different the card text and terminology of the previous edition is).

      That said, I do appreciate a good-looking game, and the IELLO version is definitely the more attractive.

      Thanks very much for reading.

  2. Pingback: The New Year Hit Parade | Painted Wooden Cubes

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s