The Count of Monte Cristo.

I’ve been lax in book blogging lately, between year-end lists and a run of longer reads (a few of which were duds) and the mystery/detective novels I don’t review unless it’s by an author I haven’t discussed before. The one loooong read that’s worth a mention here is Alexandre Dumas’ (père, which I won’t mention again because it’s not like anyone remembers anything his son wrote) The Count of Monte Cristo, which surpassed Gone with the Wind as the longest novel I’ve ever read. It’s on the Bloomsbury and Guardian top 100 lists, and while it didn’t have the same chewy center as Dumas’ The Three Musketeers, it was still a fun and surprisingly rapid read.

Edmond Dantes is the Count of the title, although as the story opens he’s just an amiable young sailor, about to marry the girl of his dreams and earn a big promotion on the boat where he works, all of which pisses off his two main rivals in love and at sea. Those two conspire with a third man to ruin Dantes by a letter falsely accusing him of treason, which, thanks to a corrupt prosecutor looking to save his own hide, lands Dantes in a notorious prison, jailed without trial or even knowing the charge, with no hope of release or leniency.

After fourteen years in captivity, Dantes manages an escape (one of the book’s highlights), finds great wealth via his only friend in prison, and resurrects himself as The Count of Monte Cristo. This mysterious saint-like figure has infinite wealth and uses it to spare people in need, many of whom fail to recognize their former friend or rival after his long absence and changed appearance. Now 33, the Count plays the longest con of all, plotting to ruin the lives of the men who tried to ruin his and mostly succeeded. Over the course of maybe 300,000 words, about the length of three typical novels, Dantes lays elaborate traps for the three men most responsible for his plight, but, as you’d expect, runs into a few unforeseen complications that provoke introspection and self-doubt to let Dumas pad the ol’ word count a little further.

A superficial read of The Count of Monte Cristo as the mother of all revenge stories (which, by the way, is based on the true story of a Frenchman who did a lot of what Dantes did, just without all the cash) would still be time well spent. Dumas had the knack for building tension without seeming false, then providing huge, satisfying resolutions that are plausible within the confines of the story. If you accept the premise of Dantes obtaining an endless supply of money, then much of what comes afterwards is surprisingly realistic for a novel of the romantic/traditional period. Dumas paints the three targets as awful people, and you’ll find yourself rooting for him to give them what for. Even when there’s collateral damage, Dantes endeavors to make things right – money allows a vengeful man to be more precise – to keep the reader happy that no women or children will be unduly harmed in the reading of this novel.

Of course, you could also wring enough symbolism out of this book to send the Seine spilling over its banks, staring with Dantes himself coming back from the dead – or a stone crypt of sorts – at age 33, just like Jesus Christ. Dantes even believes himself to be sent by God, or an instrument of God to spread good fortune to those who deserve it and to crush those who would do or have done evil in the past (to him, that is). He’s not Jesus, but he’s Jesus-like, in the literary sense, which I imagine has been fodder for countless term papers and college theses.

Dantes is not perturbed by the thought of being used by a benevolent Deity to bring ill fortune or even death on those who have done others harm until after he’s nearly completed his scorched-earth campaign from Provence to Paris. He even acquires a coterie of servants and acolytes and helps them obtain revenge they were unaware they could achieve, again with little thought to whether these acts were, in themselves, evil, or at least un-Christian. The twisted theology of the Count, coupled with his monomaniacal pursuit of vengeance, might have rendered him more insane than saintly; there is no potential for forgiveness or a commutation of the sentences Dantes plans to deliver. Even though the men who wronged him don’t deserve clemency and continue to act without regard for the well-being of others, Dantes goes way too long – years, at least – before experiencing anything like remorse for his own ruthlessness in smiting his enemies.

I wouldn’t say I’m likely to reread the book, but it might be a more fruitful read to consider it as Dantes’ search for meaning, the development of his own philosophy of life. He enters the prison believing he knows all that matters, and leaves it full of practical knowledge but emotionally void other than his wish for vengeance. Through years of wealth, of making others’ dreams come true, of ruining lives that were probably worth ruining but also ruining a few others in the process, the Count arrives at a very different mental state than the one he held at the start of the book. He never monologues but does offer hints at his newfound philosophical leaning, such as:

“There is neither happiness nor misery in the world; there is only the comparison of one state with another, nothing more.”

There’s some ambiguity in the end of The Count of Monte Cristo, but with hints that Dantes intends to retire from public life, in a somewhat monastic sense, which would provide a clever parallel to his time in prison, where he was deprived of almost everything except for the companionship of the abbe in the next cell. Dumas recognizes that you can’t bring a life full circle because Dantes can’t undo all the damage done. Instead, he gives Dantes satisfaction enough to sail off into the novel’s sunset, unfulfilled emotionally but at least bearing the pride of a twenty-year-old task completed.

* Two wonderful quotes about food from this book, the first describing what we know recognize as umami, the “fifth taste” found in foods high in glutamates:

“Tell me, the first time you tasted oysters, tea, porter, truffles, and sundry other dainties which you now adore, did you like them?”

And the second, a serious line that reads as a joke now, one that could only have been penned by a Frenchman:

“condemned to partake of Italian cookery—that is, the worst in the world.”

* Euphemisms for death abound in every language, and, along with euphemisms for sex, show tremendous creativity. Dumas offers one I hadn’t seen before, with one character asking if anther has “paid the last debt of nature?”

* I mentioned reading a few duds that didn’t merit writeups. Two were from the Bloomsbury list – Herman Hesse’s Narcissus and Goldmund, a fable about two men who choose widely divergent paths in search of enlightenment, and Arnold Bennett’s The Old Wives’ Tale, a romantic (in the traditional sense) novel about two sisters with widely divergent personalities who live separate, different lives but end up in the same place. I also read Anne Tyler’s Pulitzer Prize-winning novel Breathing Lessons, which is just a bad Richard Russo book. Next up: Sophie’s World: A Novel About the History of Philosophy, a 1991 book by Jostein Gaarder.

iOS games on sale.

There are a number of iOS boardgame apps on sale right now through Christmas (and sometimes beyond), so rather than tweet a bunch of links I figured I’d list the ones I recommend here. If you’re looking for recent content, my Top Chef recap went up Thursday night and contains links to everything I’ve written this week.

  • Small World 2, on sale for $4.99 right now. I love this game and app and gave the pre-update version a very positive review.
  • Reiner Knizia’s Tigris & Euphrates, just $0.99 right now, as are all Codito titles except Puerto Rico. I liked this one from the start, but the update to the graphics earlier this year made it much easier on the eyes.
  • Le Havre, also $0.99 as it’s another Codito title. It’s from the designer of Agricola but brings in elements of Caylus; I think it’s the most complex boardgame I’ve ever played, and it works way better in an app version than it did tabletop because of all of the pieces involved. My review from June 2012 is from the original release.
  • Agricola, down to $4.99 from $6.99, but now with the I and K card decks available as in-app purchases. If you haven’t played the physical game, those decks come standard and offer a lot more occupations and opportunities for interaction with other players. You can read my review of the base game from July.
  • Caylus – Big Daddy’s Creations, down to $2.99 from $4.99. My original app review came before some minor bug fixes, and this probably still has the best, brightest graphics of any game app in the field.
  • Baldur’s Gate: Enhanced Edition – Beamdog, down to $6.99. It’s not a board game, but a classic RPG that has been adapted to iOS. I’ve played and reviewed it; it’s very good, especially after a recent update included many of the features that originally appeared in the Throne of Bhaal sequel to BG2.
  • Sid Meier’s Pirates!, down to $0.99. Also not a boardgame, just another PC classic ported to iOS. My original review is from September of 2011; I liked it, but didn’t love it, because it becomes monotonous after an hour or two – but you’ll get your 99 cents’ worth.

Top Chef, S11E11.

It’s been a busy writing and podcasting week for me; here’s what I’ve spit out in the last three days:

We start with the usual stew room footage. Nina has some mouth on her. She might swear more than all the boys combined.

* ?uestlove in the house, hairpick included. He says he’d fly to any corner of the earth to try a new food. Fried drumsticks were part of a signature dish at Hybrid, his Manhattan restaurant that closed last month. The chefs have thirty minutes to prepare a dish with any of the various kinds of drumsticks on display. A drumline marches in with a giant cart of drumsticks from at least five different fowl. Winner gets immunity.

* There’s a ridiculous mad dash for the various proteins. Why not just draw knives? Instead we get drumsticks on the floor and bruised egos. Nick seems dismayed to get quail, but I’d love that – they cook fast, at least, although there’s not a lot of meat on one leg.

* Stephanie gets turkey legs and says, “I see a very specific stall at Disney world where people just mow down on them.” I have been one of those people. Meanwhile, Nina gets guinea hen, and is making grilled jerk chicken. She’s gone outside of Caribbean cuisine maybe twice all season, for gnocchi.

* Shirley’s duck legs fry too fast – you can see the meat has started to dry out even on TV.

* Stephanie: “nothing could be grosser than medium rare turkey.” Well, maybe rare turkey, but point taken.

* Carlos is trying to cut a goose leg bone with a chef’s knife, and keeps going despite a total lack of progress. Sisyphus told me he thought that looked frustrating.

* Carrie does squab legs marinated in thyme, cayenne, and cocoa powder with a fig mostarda. I’m not sure I’ve ever had a mostarda, and now I’m wondering why not as it sounds awesome – a sort of quick jam of dried fruit, sugar, dry mustard, and wine (or just essential oil of mustard). Anyway, I’m spoiling this a bit, but she ends up winning, and Nina gives her the stinkeye across the kitchen.

* For completeness – the least favorites were Nick’s oversalted quail, Justin’s boring/uncreative drumettes, and Carlos’ overcooked goose. Beside Carrie and Nina, Brian was in the favorites group for a soup that included cracklins.

* Elimination challenge: Feed 500 incoming freshmen at LSU in the school kitchen. Winner gets a RAV4. They stay in the dorms that night. I have enough bad dreams about being in college and forgetting to go to class, or choosing not to go to class again without telling anyone, or the usual “show up for the exams without going to class all semester” stuff. I don’t need to stay in a dorm and trigger more. Anyway, I do love going to LSU for baseball games – the atmosphere is incredible.

* Stephanie is my go-to girl for money quotes: “Every memory of living in the dorm is coming back to me.” Turns out she went to boarding school, which she implies is because her parents were wealthy (since she says it wasn’t about behavior). Meanwhile, Carrie doesn’t know how to make a bed. How is that possible? Okay, her husband does it – I do a lot of the laundry around here too – but she never learned as a kid?
* The mad-dash setup from the Quickfire is here too – there are eight stations and a pantry of ingredients, so chefs are calling dibs on stations and fighting for ingredients. Why not set up a draft: order them 1 to 8, pick stations in that order, then go 8 to 1 for proteins or other main ingredients? Any system would be better than this.

* Shirley claims the plancha (flat-top grill), then Carlos whines enough to convince her to give it up and take the wood-fired oven, which no one else wanted. This, kids, is known as foreshadowing…

* By the way: No one wants the wood-burning oven? Really? Hottest spot in the kitchen. You ever have a burger cooked at 1000 degrees Fahrenheit? It’s incredible. You can do stuff in that oven faster than in any gas or electric oven or on any other cooking surface.
* Nick is stirring a giant swimming pool of grits like he’s piloting a gondola through them. I’m pretty sure Homer Simpson had that dream once.

* Justin gives a rant about how he doesn’t “think it’s ever a good idea to cook down to people,” but then says that college students probably like chicken tenders and mac and cheese, so he’s talking down to them instead of cooking down to them. This is another example of foreshadowing.

* Carrie got the cold station and makes a cold broccoli salad with yogurt dressing. I like broccoli, but it looks like she barely cooked it. Why not do an elaborate salad if you want to go veg and have to keep everything cold and would maybe like to win a car?

* Nina is in the weeds, which is unusual for her, blaming part of her problem on the lack of an industrial blender. Maybe she could have taken that into consideration before deciding to do a giant corn puree.

* Carrie is getting virtually no takers, and says (half-jokingly), “it’s not my fault the kids are stupid and don’t eat their broccoli.” Well, they’re not stupid if they won’t eat that broccoli.

* Carlos is falling behind after claiming the plancha and now thinks he should also have the ovens. Pretty soon he’ll just claim the car and complain if the other chefs won’t give it to him.

* And the dishes … this is getting easier to write as the number of chefs dwindles: Shirley does roast beef with potato puree and fire-roasted tomato relish, making good use of the wood-fired oven; Nina does buttermilk once-fried chicken with sweet corn puree and pickled onions, but the breading keeps falling off and she can’t keep up with demand for the corn; Brian makes a shrimp cake with spinach on top and a chipotle aioli (using storebought mayo?) underneath. Shirley and Brian score well, but Nina’s fried chicken fares worse for the above reasons plus the corn puree making the breading soggy.

* Nick serves rosemary roasted pork with parmesan grits and a bacon brown sugar gravy; Carrie serves that marinated broccoli salad with herbed yogurt sauce; Justin does a marinated gulf shrimp with cauliflower, asparagus, and garlic puree. Justin’s apparently had less flavor than wallpaper paste and no one could identify the puree.

* Stephanie’s spicy tomato soup with pimento cheese sandwich is undone because she served the sandwiches already dipped in the soup, which made them soggy by the time they reached the table; Carlos’s seared tilapie with chile ancho and Mexican slaw plays second fiddle to his fifteen-minute delay and his claim to the judges that Nick stole his ovens. Nina is pissed off, and Nick refusees to believe it at first.

* In “the kill room” (thanks, Steph), everyone goes after Carlos for saying that to the judges. He apologizes, but it’s one of those “I’m sorry I got caught” apologies I get from daughter. He knew what he was saying.

* Judges’ table: Brian and Shirley get raves. Carlos’ flavors were great but service took too long. Justin and Nina get crushed, as does Carrie, who might have gone home had she not had immunity.

* Top three: Shirley, Brian, and Carlos. Brian’s was the most popular with the students, but Shirley wins the challenge, I think in part for looking at the pizza oven as (Tom’s words) “just an oven.” That’s a car and a $10,000 air conditioner for Shirley.

* Bottom: Stephanie, Nina, and Justin. Nina failed twice over – a lot of students didn’t get the corn, but it also made the fried chicken a little soggy. Stephanie used too much cottage cheese (Steph says it was feta) that made the sandwich’s texture inconsistent, plus it disintegrated in the soup. Justin tries to brag about going high-end (too “cheffy” per Gail), but he didn’t understand the audience and didn’t get enough flavor in the dish. I wonder if he still thinks as little of college students’ palates as he did when the show started.

* Nina does the false modesty act in the stew room, saying “it was a pleasure working with you all” as if she’s already been eliminated. She’s not quite the villain the producers want, but she might be the best they’ve got.

* Justin is eliminated, as Tom says it was the worst dish out of all eight, period. Hard to argue given what they said before – it had to be him or Stephanie, and I’m not sorry to see him go after his act in Restaurant Wars.

* LCK: I’ve been trying not to comment on Janine’s looks, but she was wearing a little pink sundress in this episode that was so short that at first she couldn’t sit on the high peanut gallery chairs. The challenge, meanwhile, was to cook with a basket of ingredients from the other chef’s current hometown, so Justin from NorCal, Louis from Louisiana. Justin does a grilled sardine with corn vinaigrette and fresh herbs, chooses not to use crab or grapes. Louis does a redfish almondine with corn puree and crawfish sauce, didn’t use peaches or rabbit. Justin slightly overcooked his sardine – it did catch on fire at one point – so Louis gets the W. His dish seemed more creative anyway.

* Rankings: Nick and Shirley remain the clear 1-2 for me. After that, I’d probably go Carrie, Louis (in response to one of your queries, it’s time to work in the current LCK leader), Nina, Brian, Carlos, Stephanie. I don’t think Nina has the breadth to hold on till the finale – it’s the same basic formula over and over – and the bottom three chefs all seem capable of some self-sabotage. Even Carrie feels like a soft pick at 3, as she coasted on her immunity this week.

Top 100 songs of 2013.

Last year I discovered (for myself, that is) enough good new music to do my first serious annual music ranking, listing my top 40 songs of 2012, a list that I originally intended to just go to 20 titles but that kept expanding as I kept writing and exploring. This year, I started the exploring a little sooner, and also ended up on a few promotional lists that exposed me to even more new stuff, so by midyear it was very clear to me that I’d have more than enough songs to get to 100. I had over 150 candidates if you count all of the album tracks I liked enough to consider, but forced it down to 100 (which didn’t work out that well, as you’ll see shortly).

As with my list of the top albums of 2013, this list is my personal preference. If I don’t like a song, it’s not here. That wipes out some critically-acclaimed artists entirely, including Daft Punk, Haim, Vampire Weekend, Deafheaven (and please, people, death metal and black metal are not the same thing), Rhye, the Lumineers (more like Ho Hum), American Authors, James Blake, Foxygen, Majikal Cloudz, Phosphorescent, Jason Isbell (I just do not like country music), and My Bloody Valentine. Other folks liked that stuff. I didn’t.

Some songs that were among the last ones I cut from my list, in no particular order, looking just at artists that didn’t make it: Birds of Tokyo – “Lanterns;” Midlake – “Antiphon;” Harrison Hudson – “Curious;” Cumulus – “Do You Remember;” Young Galaxy – “Pretty Boy;” The 1975 – “Chocolate;” Blondfire – “Waves.” The last two got the axe for lyrics too stupid for me to abide. I’ve mentioned several other songs I liked, but not enough to get them into the top 100, within the comments below.

I’m going to start with two extra tracks that were the final two cuts from the list, ones I actually wrote up at first before realizing I’d forgotten two other tracks that belonged on here.

Wild Nothing – Dancing Shell. One of my biggest misses from my 2012 list was Wild Nothing’s Nocturne, which I picked up in January on the recommendations of several readers and loved for its dream-pop leanings with experimental twists – but with more guitar than most bands in this subgenre employ. “Dancing Shell” is more dance/electronic than straight-ahead rock but showcases the creativity of Jack Tatum, who records all of Wild Nothing’s music himself, with other members joining him just for live shows. His 2013 EP wasn’t as good as Nocturne but including this song lets me mention again how badly I whiffed by not including the album on my list from last year.

Ejecta – Jeremiah (The Denier). A side project for Neon Indian’s keyboardist Leanne Macomber, Ejecta offers spacey electro-pop, although I think they’ve received more press for their debut album’s cover, which features a nude Macomber posing as if one of the great Renaissance masters was about to paint her. That might just be overshadowing the music, which has the early-80s New Wave leanings of most electro-pop but pairs it with Macomber’s languorous, breathy vocals to temper its brightness. “It’s Only Love” is also worth checking out.

And now, to the top 100. This entire list, including both of those bonus tracks, is available as a Spotify playlist, in order. Amazon and iTunes links go to full albums, where you can just buy the specific song I mentioned (this reduced the number of links I had to create).
[Read more…]

Top 13 albums of 2013.

This year was so fertile for new music that, for the first time, I felt like I heard enough records I liked to put together a ranking of my favorite albums of the year. The expansion of Spotify’s catalog didn’t hurt, as now I didn’t have to own every album (or pirate them, which I won’t do) to review them, and I’ve received a few of these via publicists or record labels, including the albums at 4, 5, and 6.

This list represents my personal preferences. The omission of some critically-acclaimed albums, like those from the National, Vampire Tweekend, Daft Punk, and Haim, is deliberate. I don’t like ’em, ergo, they’re not here. The same goes for Mercury Prize winner James Blake, who wasn’t even the best solo male artist nominated for the award this year. If you’re looking for alt-J’s An Awesome Wave, that was my favorite album of 2012, as it was released in the U.S. last September.

I’ll post my top 100 songs of the year on Thursday, and mention in each review how many tracks from that album will appear on that list.

13. Teeth of the Sea – Master. (amazoniTunes)Part of me isn’t even sure why I’m putting a record I don’t even fully understand on this list; like Field of Reeds from These New Puritans, Master is aiming for something well beyond the scope of what I enjoy and appreciate in modern music. While plenty of electronic acts earned airplay and mainstream plaudits in 2013, I don’t think anyone produced anything as ambitious within that subgenre as Teeth of the Sea did here, creating a dark, immersive record that at times seemed to draw more inspiration from symphonic death metal (like a vocal-free Hollenthon) than it did from the heart of current electronica. The record placed one song on my top 100, but that’s in part of a function of the album working better as a whole than in singles.

12. Frank Turner – Tape Deck Heart. (amazoniTunes)Turner’s brand of punk-folk, or whatever it is, is incredibly endearing mostly because he seems to cram more lyrics into each minute than Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell spat out in His Girl Friday. It’s the kind of album that should be enjoyed along with two fingers of your favorite distilled spirit, or a pint of a good, not-too-cold Irish or English beer, even though the album’s best song is about the difficulty of drying oneself out. Turner hides nothing, and his writing skills lie in his ability to translate sadness and hurt into darkly humorous lyrics. The album placed one song on my top 100.

11. Wooden Shjips – Back to Land. (amazoniTunes)Can I just pronounce this “Wooden Shyips?” Because that’s what I want to do every time I see their name. Like Teeth of the Sea, Wooden Shjips are better consumed as a whole disc than as individual singles, here because everything is good and nothing stands out in a huge way from the album’s mean. They get the “psychedelic” tag a lot, although I think some of that is just because they use a Hammond organ, but it’s guitar-driven rock with extended song structures and maybe a little too much reverb in the vocals. It might be more fair to think of them as a jam band that keeps things tight on record. It didn’t place any songs on my top 100, with “Ruins” my favorite track because it sounds like a party’s about to break out in the studio.

10. Carcass – Surgical Steel. (amazoniTunes) I actually don’t listen to much metal, let alone extreme metal variations, with the exception of melodic death metal – very fast, heavy music with lyrics that are often screamed rather than sung, but with tremendous technical musicianship and actual melodies that require a little work to find but that provide balance for music that can be brutal and intense. Carcass was probably the progenitor of the subgenre but hadn’t released any new material since 1996’s disappointing Swansong, but their comeback album this year, Surgical Steel, is a true return to form but with a newer maturity, including tighter song structures and lots of allusions to their heyday as grindcore pioneers. Other metal albums I liked from 2013: Children of Bodom’s Halo of Blood, Trivium’s Vengeance Falls, Born of Osiris’ Tomorrow We Die Δlive, and Týr’s Valkyrja.

9. Naked and Famous – In Rolling Waves. (amazoniTunes) The sophomore album from this New Zealand act is more lush than their debut, giving lead signer Alisa Xayalith more room to sing rather than shouting vocals over louder, heavier music as she had to do on their first two hits, “Young Blood” and “Punching in a Dream.” It’s a more serious album, with slower builds and more modest payoffs, weaving textures rather than building off giant hooks – if anything, the catchier tracks are among the album’s weaker ones, except for lead single “Hearts Like Ours” and the duet “The Mess.” I don’t award points for a band making progress per se, but the result here of the band maturing from a shorter singles-oriented sound to a more ambitious overall sound made it among the year’s best discs. The album placed one song on my top 100.

8. Arcade Fire – Reflektor. (iTunesiTunes) I’ve had multiple readers ask me if I’ve changed my mind on this album since giving it a middling review about a week after its release, which I find strange mostly because … well, is it that important that I like the album? I don’t pretend my opinion means anything beyond giving you guys something to read and talk about, so I don’t think the fact that I found this album disappointing is such a big deal. I loved The Suburbs, but Reflektor went so far in the opposite direction – bloated song times, pretentious lyrics, too few musical ideas – that I couldn’t help but feel let down. LCD Soundsystem’s James Murphy, himself known for songs about twice as long as they needed to be, produced the album, and he was probably the wrong choice for a band that can’t rein itself in. This was a good album relative to other releases this year, but it could have been so much better. The album placed three tracks on my top 100.

7. Jake Bugg – Shangri La. (amazoniTunes) I whiffed on Bugg’s self-titled debut album for last year’s list; the album came out last October and I didn’t hear anything of it until well into 2013. I’ve caught up now, as Bugg’s second album came out in November and features more of the same Dylanesque sound, but better, including the punkish “What Doesn’t Kill You?,” the rockabilly opener “There’s a Beast and We All Feed It,” and the shuffling ballad “Me and You,” itself a late cut from my top 100. Bugg is just 19 and has only begun to scratch the surface of what could be an enormous career as Dylan’s spiritual heir. The album placed one track on my top 100.

6. Polvo – Siberia. (amazoniTunes)The second post-breakup (and post-reunion) album from these 1990s noise-rock cult heroes might be their best effort yet, packing plenty of weirdness into its eight tracks but never losing the plot. It’s heavy on twin guitars, even though they often sound like they might not be playing the same song, and the lyrics are trippy if you like them and nonsense if you don’t. I particularly like how the album feels heavy without being loud or extreme, an example of where modern metal often goes wrong; you don’t need to sing like Cookie Monster to create the impression of weight. The album placed two tracks on my top 100.

5. St. Lucia – When the Night. (amazoniTunes) One of the best debut albums of the year and one of its best pure-pop records, When the Night is the first effort from the South African-born New York native Jean-Philip Grobler, who has remixed many better-known artists and produced the debut album from HAERTS. St. Lucia’s sound is sweet synth-pop with global influences in the rhythm and percussion sections, along with a detour into darker electronic sounds on one of the album’s best tracks, “September.” Grobler occasionally veers too far into twee territory but the album has more than enough moments of balance, placing three tracks on my top 100.

4. Drenge – Drenge. The self-titled debut from these two English brothers actually isn’t out yet in the U.S., which is one of the stupidest policies left in the digital age. Why would any movie, record, or book publisher stagger release dates internationally? Ones and zeroes know nothing of your national borders. If you don’t want to encourage piracy, release everything on the same day across the world. Drenge’s album is on Spotify and I received a promo copy in November, so you can listen to it before its early 2014 release here, and it’s well worth it, with a slew of high-energy guitar/drum songs that show influences from each of the last four decades, going back to early Black Sabbath and running up through the White Stripes. The record placed three tracks on my top 100.

3. Savages – Silence Yourself. (amazoniTunes) This was my album of the year until September, when the two albums higher on this list both came out, and still wins the prize of the year’s angriest album. The all-female quartet known as Savages have produced a short eleven-track masterpiece of seething and indignation, led by French singer Jehnny Beth’s punctuated style that has her practically spitting the words at the undeserving audience. The music is post-punk in its original sense – Suicide, Television, Gang of Four – not pop, even though songs like “She Will,” “Shut Up,” and “Strife” boast strong hooks. The album placed two tracks on my top 100.

2. CHVRCHES – The Bones of What You Believe. (amazoniTunes) The debut of the year was a little uneven in spots but so exultant during most of its length that it feels captious to point out its flaws. Singer Lauren Mayberry is an emerging star, one whose future probably goes beyond the electro-pop confines of this record and perhaps the band in general, but for now the Scottish trio has crafted the year’s best pop record, with five tracks on my top 100 and one that was in the set that just missed.

1. Arctic Monkeys – AM. (amazoniTunes)Their best album since their debut, but with all that several years of maturity and musical meandering incorporated into a disc that brings an enormous range of influences to produce the year’s most compelling and most complete experience. Turner has long been one of rock’s most clever wordsmiths, but took his form of snarky-witty modern beat poetry to new heights on AM. The album placed five songs on my top 100 and could have placed two more, plus one track, “R U Mine?” that appeared on the 2012 list because it was released as a one-off single.

Homeland, season three.

I’ve joined the chorus of complaints about season three of Homeland since September, which is in large part a reaction to how amazing the first season was, but also how far the show has shifted not just in direction but in theme since that point. Tonight’s season-ender had more of the usual nonsense – absurd plotting and convenient coincidences that required more suspension of disbelief than a Uri Geller show – about which you should all feel free to rant in the comments.

I have one specific thought that made me want to weigh in after watching tonight’s show. For me, Homeland didn’t go off the rails this year, neither at the beginning nor in episode four when the first Big Reveal took place. I think the fundamental shift in the show took place in the middle of season two, when the writers chose to go from a show about facing an ill-defined, largely unknown, inbound threat to U.S. security to a show about outbound activities like attempting an internal coup d’état inside one of our strongest enemies. That sea change necessitated two adjustments in the direction of the show, both of worked very strongly against its success and defied what made the first season so compelling:

• It altered the tenor of the tension of each episode, reducing it while also narrowing its scope. In season one, the threat was global: The U.S. is going to be attacked, at some point, by unknown persons, and it could be massive in scale. During season two, the threat to the U.S. was diminished – nearly all of the season was devoted to smaller matters like chasing down individual suspects, with the eventual attack coming more or less out of nowhere. Season three was entirely about individual tension – first with Carrie appearing to be a prisoner of the CIA, then later with the attempt to engineer that internal coup within Iran’s security apparatus. Characters we know were placed in physical jeopardy, or saw their careers placed on the line, but the country was never at risk.

• When the protagonists were facing an inbound threat, we the audience were kept in the dark because the protagonists were in the dark themselves. In season three, with no inbound threat and only the outbound effort to bait, catch, and recruit a critical asset from Iran, the protagonists knew more than the writers could tell the audience, resulting in the massive unreliable-narrator arc at the start of the season but continuing through the next nine episodes. It got to the point where I trusted nothing that I saw; if Brody had done a double twist off that crane and stuck the landing in the season finale it wouldn’t have surprised me. The only way to create the tension the writers wanted was to hide, mislead, and lie. I was okay with it once. I was not okay with a full season of it.

The other fundamental problem with season three, for me, dated back to a problem I had in season one, something that I doubt is universal but started to detract seriously from the viewing experience in season two: I never cared about the relationship between Brody and Carrie. It seemed improbable and forced at the start, and eventually devolved into farce. Carrie becoming pregnant with his baby – really, neither of them thought about birth control? – read like a desperate attempt to infuse life and interest into a relationship that, for me, was nothing but a distraction from the cloak and dagger stuff that made season one click.

I won’t go into all of the plot holes and inconsistencies, as Alan Sepinwall has done that already. I don’t entirely agree with Alan’s sentiment that there shouldn’t have been a second season, but I agree that the way it was handled was less than ideal, and a once-great show has lost its way, to the point where season four is going to have to entice a lot of viewers, myself included, back.

This is pretty much always true, but just in case: Anything is fair game in the comments below, including spoilers and comments on stuff I didn’t mention. I’m curious to hear what others thought about tonight’s episode and the season as a whole.

Top Chef, S11E10.

Catching up on my recent work elsewhere:

I traveled home from Orlando on Thursday, was catching up on life on Friday (although I did at least watch this show), and then spent Saturday being a dad, from getting the Christmas tree to going to see Frozen with my wife and daughter. Je ne regrette rien … but I’m a little sorry this post is late.

* Quickfire: Chef Hubert Keller is there … in a challenge involving Dunkin Donuts coffee, which I’m hoping these chefs think and realize is total shit. Does Keller really drink this garbage? He should be furious that they brought him in to watch the chefs cook with coffee I wouldn’t feed to a goat. The winner gets immunity and $10K, while Stephie Downer gets all mopey about owning “old, broken, sad-looking stuff.” That girl could see death in a double rainbow.

* So the actual challenge involves using that brown swill as a key ingredient in a dish, with the implication that it would be better to go savory, although that didn’t matter in the judging.

* Nick is pairing sockeye salmon with a coffee cardamom sauce, emphasizing the balance between the fatty fish and the sharp coffee (and cardamom) flavors. Balance will be irrelevant when Chef Sensitive Ponytail chokes to death on a pinbone.

* Brian is making a risotto with coffee and andouille sausage, alluding to the Top Chef risotto curse. I’m surprised he doesn’t mention redeye gravy, which is a Southern comfort-food staple where you make a white sausage gravy and add coffee to it. I’ve never had it because what kind of lunatic puts coffee in sausage gravy? Also, maybe there’s a better way to describe taking a risk than saying you want your balls out there swinging. It’s just not a great visual.

* Interesting side note: Nina predicts that Nick will reach the finale. Granted, that’s not huge news at this point, but we don’t generally hear a lot of praise like that on Top Chef.

* The food: Travis also serves sockeye, this one with a coffee ponzu sauce, coffee roasted mushrooms, and hazelnut oil; Carrie does a coffee custard with candied coffee beans and cocoa nibs; Brian serves that risotto with sugar snap peas; Carlos makes a coffee macadamia sponge cake (in just thirty minutes) with a coffee/mascarpone sauce and peaches; Nick makes a roasted sockeye with a hazelnut-coffee-caramel-white chocolate whatever and hon shimeji mushrooms, earning funny looks from the judges and a “there’s a lot of coffee in here” non-compliment from Padma.

* Shirley serves a coffee-crusted tenderloin with a double-blanched garlic puree that symbolizes the cream to the steak rub’s coffee; Stephanie, who got all woe-is-me again during the cooking, does a sweet potato and goat cheese coffee crepe with ham and bacon coffee jam. I don’t think we saw Nina or Justin in this.

* The bottom two were Brian, whose risotto didn’t have much coffee flavor, and Nick, whose coffee-white chocolate paste had an unpleasant texture. Ho hum. The top three were Shirley, Carrie, and Stephanie, with Stephanie and Shirley both getting “surprising” from Keller. The winner, the chef who showed the most creativity was … Shirley? Steak rubbed with coffee is more creative than coffee crepes with sweet potato and goat cheese and bacon-coffee jam? Did we miss something in the dish descriptions? Shirley’s dish may have been delicious, but anyone in America who’s grilled meat with a dry rub on it (worded to avoid a #phrasing tag) has tried coffee in the rub, right?
* Elimination challenge: The guest judge is actor Anthony Mackie, whom I’ve never heard of and don’t recognize. He was in 8 Mile, which I’ve seen, and in two Best Picture winners that I haven’t seen; he also narrated an ESPN 30 for 30 doc, “The Best That Never Was,” on the disappointing career of high school football star Marcus Dupree. Anyway, Mackie is a New Orleans native, and the challenge is for the chefs “to make a dish inspired by what you crave when you go home.” Oh, and they’re serving Leah Chase and some of her family at Dookie Chase. No big deal.
* Justin’s dish is inspired by squirrel he and his brothers used to hunt, but I guess he couldn’t get organic squirrel at Whole Foods.

* Carrie talks about going asparagus hunting with her mom. I didn’t realize asparagus was that hard to catch.

* Nick is making his daughter’s favorite dish, ricotta gnocchi, which appears to be on his menu at Laurel now.

* Carlos is making cochinita pibil in the pressure cooker, as the dish typically takes about six hours. I thought it was generally roasted in a banana leaf, although now I realize I don’t know if that’s to add flavor or just as a vessel to allow it to retain heat.

* Shirley is kneading dough and dicing meat with a cleaver, shaking the entire table. Stephanie is silently plotting to murder Shirley in her sleep that night.

* Travis is making biscuits without buttermilk, which surprises Tom. I’m with Travis for once; I don’t like the flavor of cultured buttermilk, and usually use baking powder instead of baking soda, or use cream of tartar (an acid found on the inside of wine casks) to balance the base of baking soda.

* Brian’s personal story is a legitimate downer: his dad suffered three major strokes a few years ago which left him not talking much. Some of these chefs cry at the drop of a hat; Brian’s dad’s fate is something we all fear for our parents and for ourselves.

* Back at the house, there’s a loose discussion of what three items you’d choose if you had to eat just those things for the rest of your life, which leads Justin to act like a clubhouse lawyer again. There’s an inability to take responsibility with him that grates on me, probably because I was like that when I was younger. Anyway, pizza, ice cream, waffles, bacon, nectarines, bread … don’t make me stop at three.
* Nick gets choked up talking about missing formative years with his kids because he’s always at work. This is why I think people who ask me why I would choose the media over a team job, or assume I’m lying when I say that’s my choice, are stupid. If you choose to prioritize work over family, I won’t judge you, but don’t judge me for going the other way. I’ve been at just about every birthday, holiday, school event, and extracurricular event I needed to be at. I take my daughter to school almost every day when I’m home, I pick her up almost every day when I’m home, we cook together, we read together, and we do all kinds of things together. I know I’m not the perfect father, but I will never have to look at a camera like Nick did and say that I regret spending too little time with my daughter.

* There’s no open grill at Dookie Chase, so Brian has to use the grill pan instead and rely on the marinade (he’s making Korean-marinaded New York strip steaks) for flavor.

* Travis is staring at his biscuits as they’re in the oven, saying how he’s only got one shot, do not miss your chance … sorry. They look good but are close to raw inside. I assumed he cut the butter in too much, although later it emerges that the kitchen was so warm that the butter got too soft before hitting the oven. He ends up splitting the biscuits and pouring gravy over them to try to hide the error, because that trick always works.

* And we’re plating … Carlos’ cochinita pibil comes with black beans and an orange pico de gallo; Brian does the steak and potatoes Korean-style, a NY strip with a potato salad; Travis’ biscuits come with a homemade maple-sage sausage gravy and sour plum jam.

* Everyone notices that the biscuit is raw, so we can already put Travis in the bottom three. They all love the gravy and Mackie likes the gravy and jam together. I could see that – a sour/sweet note with the salty/sweet sausage. Carlos’ is a big hit right down to the fresh corn tortillas. Brian’s has no charcoal flavor and might be a touch too sweet.

* We see Nick losing focus in the kitchen, worrying he won’t plate everything, crying over the sink because … he misses his family? Right then, five minutes before serving? I’m calling BS on this one. That had to be shown out of sequence, right?

* Nick’s dish is ricotta gnudi with crispy pancetta, peas, lemon, and “a lot of” Parmiggiano-Reggiano; Shirley serves Bejing hand-cut noodles, fermented bean and pork sauce, and pickled radishes; Stephanie serves focaccia and mussels with spicy pickled peppers and tomatoes.

* They adore Nick’s pasta, and the pancetta is “nice and crispy.” Anthony says, “I wish I was his daughter!” All righty then. Emeril likes Shirley’s noodles after he added the vinegar from radishes to the pasta itself. Stephanie’s mussels surprise everyone – they usually come with a lot of garlic (Leah pointed this out), while Tom says he’s never had pickled peppers with mussels but loves the combination.

* Justin serves Louisiana rice and chicken thigh gravy, pickled mirliton, and jalapeñ Carrie serves creamed asparagus over (homemade) toast with a poached egg; Nina does, of course, a curried chicken with fried bakes, a very basic fried-dough concoction from Trinidad that uses flour, water, salt, and baking powder.

* Leah’s son says he could “go to town on” Carrie’s dish. Nina’s is good, but Padma and Leah want rice rather than avocado – I don’t think fried bread and curry is a great combination, as you’re putting heavy with heavy. Justin’s is a touch dry but otherwise good. Leah’s daughter says of all nine dishes that they had “nothing outrageously negative to say about anything.”

* Judges’ table: The stories were great and the food was delicious. Tom singles out Carlos and Nina. Padma cites Stephanie, who gets big props for serving pickled peppers with mussels. Anthony enjoyed Carrie’s. Brian gets points for the jus on his steak, Nicholas for his gnocchi/gnudi, and Shirley for her noodles. And that’s all the chefs get before they’re called in.

* Top three: Nick, Stephanie, and Carlos. Padma is telegraphing it as they walk in, as she can barely contain her smile. Nick’s dish, from the sound of it, was perfect; the gnocchi were soft and light, the peas were perfectly cooked, and the pancetta was crispy. Everyone loved Stephanie’s choice to put pickled peppers and tomatoes with mussels as something new and different. Emeril said the mussels were “perfectly, perfectly cooked,” which I’d mock except I use the term “plus-plus” all the time. She also says she smelled every mussel to make sure it was fresh, which is kind of why I don’t usually eat mussels – one bad one can spoil a batch and a weekend. Anthony says Carlos’ was so good he wanted to savor every last bite and held the last bit of tortilla till the last bite off the plate. Nick wins. Anthony says the dish “made me happy as a little girl!”

* Big cheers for Nick when he returns to the stew room, especially from Shirley and Nina. Ladies love a devoted father. Also, have I mentioned lately how important my daughter is to me?

* Bottom three: Travis, Brian, and Justin. It’s not Justin – that’s obvious – and at this point I’d be shocked if it wasn’t Travis going home. Padma admits “we had to move down to the finer nuances of the dishes” to make their decisions. Brian admits he improvised, knowing he was missing an essential element without the flavor of the grill. Tom says nothing was wrong, but it didn’t have the flavor you’re looking for in a grilled steak. Travis says he knew it was too warm in the kitchen to cut the butter into the biscuits but the dish “was close to home.” That’s the one time I could see the judges giving someone a pass on a bad decision – Travis was sticking to the guidelines for the challenge. Justin is getting defensive yet again when questioned about the lack of gravy on the rice. He shouldn’t go home for this, given what we’ve seen, but it would be nice to hear him say, “yes, Chef, I made a mistake,” and then maybe learn from it next time around.

* Tom says that for biscuits, the butter needs to be ice-cold and still in chunks. Anthony says he’s surprised Travis sent them out, so perhaps he’s a fan of the show too.

* Travis goes home. Padma makes her sad face. He was the only one who made a real mistake – there were nine chefs, and eight dishes that were executed correctly. On his way out, he says in the confessional that he can be totally open about who he is now. Good for him. There’s no reason on earth he should have to hide an essential part of his identity.

* Last Chance Kitchen: Louis wins. I found this one of the least interesting episodes of LCK so far.

* Rankings: Nick, Shirley, Carrie, Nina, Justin, Carlos, Stephanie, Brian. I feel strongly about the top three at this point – Nina’s churning out the same kind of food again and again, Justin can’t make in-game adjustments, and Carlos has been stronger lately but uneven overall. Brian seems like the only one who has zero chance (or close to it) to reach the finals.

Top 50 boardgames.

This is now the sixth iteration of my own personal boardgame rankings, a list that’s now up to 50 titles, up ten once again from the previous year’s list. It’s not intended to be a critic’s list or an analytical take on the games; it’s about 80% based on how much we enjoy the games, with everything else – packaging and design, simplicity of rules, and in one case, the game’s importance within its niche – making up the rest.

I don’t mind a complex game, but I prefer games that offer more with less – there is an elegance in simple rules or mechanics that lead to a fun, competitive game. Don’t expect this to line up with the rankings at BoardGameGeek, where there’s something of a bias toward more complex games, which is fine but doesn’t line up perfectly with my own tastes.

I’ve expanded the list to include several games I have only played via iOS app implementations, rather than physical copies. As always, clicking on the game title takes you to amazon.com; if I have a full review posted on the site, the link to that will follow immediately. I’ve linked to app reviews where appropriate too. I’ve got most of these games in my aStore on amazon and am gradually adding the rest.

I’ve added a list of titles at the end that I have played at least once but not enough to offer a review of them or rank them. Many of those will appear on a future list once I get to play them more.

Finally, as with last year’s list, you’ll find a complexity grade to the end of each review, low/medium/high, to make it easier for you to jump around and see what games might appeal to you. I don’t think there’s better or worse complexity, just different levels for different kinds of players. My wife prefers medium; I’m somewhere between medium and high. This isn’t like ordering a filet and asking for it well done.

50. Tikal: Full review. Strongly balanced game of board exploration, but the length of time between any single player’s turns, especially with three or four players, is a real drawback. Players compete to control temples and acquire treasures while building out a board representing a Central American jungle; control of those temples can change from turn to turn, and each player’s ten “actions” presents an enormous list of potential decisions to position his/her pieces for maximum points in each of the scoring rounds. That makes it interesting to play, but also leads to the long gaps between turns. Plays two to seven, but doesn’t play well with two. The app implementation helps a little, but it’s still a pretty slow game overall. Complexity: Medium.

49. Hacienda. I’ve only played the app version (review), but it’s a solid tile-placement game with a strange scoring twist – the game comprises two phases, and the score from the short first phase is doubled and added to the score from the second phase for the final tally. Players compete to form chains of tiles on a board with various terrain hexes, racking up points for connecting to markets, creating larger herds of animals, and placing hacienda tokens on large chains. Through the Desert does this theme one better but Hacienda has more variable play as well as a huge set of user-generated maps available online. Complexity: Medium.

48. Hey, That’s My Fish! The rare kids’ boardgame (just $12!) that is still a fun play for adults, where players compete to score points by placing and moving their penguins across a board of hexagonal ice tiles … but the hitch is that the tile you leave then drops into the ocean, so the board changes as you go and you can even trap an opponent’s penguin if you plan it right. The app version, the only way I’ve played this game, includes some great animations, and you can unlock a number of alternate boards via achievements, most of which are low-hanging fruit. This and Blokus are the two best games specifically aimed at younger players that we’ve tried. Complexity: Low.

47. Maori: A light two- to four-player game, relatively high in the luck department for this list, with more opportunities to screw your opponent in a two player game, whereas with four players you’re focusing more on your own strategy and less on others’. In the game, players compete to fill out their own boards of 16 spaces by drawing island tiles from a central 4×4 grid, where the available selections depend on the movement of a boat token that travels around that grid’s perimeter. Players must form completed islands to receive points, and lose points for open spaces. Currently out of print, but amazon has plenty of new copies through marketplace sellers. Complexity: Low.

46. Oregon. I need to play this some more, but it does have promise as a 2-4 player game that actually works with two players. Each player competes to place meeples and buildings on a rectangular grid by playing cards that match the row and/or column in which he’s placing the pieces. Points increase when players form larger groups of farmers on adjacent squares, place buildings next to farmers already on the board, or accumulate coal and gold tokens by building mines. It’s pretty simple and quick to play, but not that deep strategically. Complexity: Low.

45. Race For The Galaxy: Full review. I’ve played this game a few more times using a freeware version I found online with very strong AI players, but that’s only served to underscore for me how much this game resembles work. It’s a deck-based game where players must know the cards in the deck well to be able to execute a strategy, and are more or less told by their initial card what strategy they must pursue. I don’t game to add to my stress levels, but this game requires such intensity of purpose that, despite a good theme and precisely designed mechanics, it feels like a responsibility rather than like fun. Android: Netrunner, a top ten overall game on BGG, suffers from a similar problem – you have to know the game intimately before you can play it well. Complexity: High.

44. Asara. Full review. Light strategy game that feels to us like a simpler, cleaner implementation of Alhambra’s theme and even some of its mechanics, without the elegance of the best family-strategy games like Stone Age or Small World. Players compete to build towers in five different colors, earning points for building the tallest ones or building the most, while dealing with a moderate element of randomness in acquiring tower parts. It’s also among the best-looking games we own, if that’s your thing. Complexity: Low.

43. Alhambra: Full review. After playing it a few more times, I do like it more than I did the first time around, but the method used to acquire money is an awful mechanic that really screws the game up (for me) with more than two players. One of the cooler-looking games in our collection. Complexity: Medium.

42. Zooloretto: Full review. A fun game, but a bit of a trifle compared to the others further up this list. You’re a zookeeper trying to fill his zoo’s three enclosures (expandable to four) with animals that arrive each turn on trucks available to all players, but each enclosure can only hold one type of animal at a time. There’s a cost to switching animals around, and there’s a penalty for picking up animals you can’t house, with points coming for filling an enclosure or filling all spots but one. I’m a little surprised this won the Spiel des Jahres, as it lacks the elegance of most winners of that award, and the two-player variant rules included in the game don’t work at all. I have played a simplified version of the game with my daughter, who loves the animal tokens and the well-drawn zoo boards. It’s a good starter game in the German-style genre, but not the best. Complexity: Low.

41. Acquire. Monopoly for grown-ups, and one of the oldest games on the list. Build hotel chains up from scratch, gain a majority of the shares, merge them, and try to outearn all your opponents. The game hinges heavily on its one random element – the draw of tiles from the pool each turn – but the decisions on buying stock in existing chains and how to sell them after a merger give the player far more control over his fate than he’d have in Monopoly. There’s a two-player variant that works OK, but it’s best with at least three people. The game looks a lot nicer now; I have a copy from the mid-1980s that still has the 1960s artwork and color scheme. Complexity: Low.

40. The Battle for Hill 218. A simple-not-that-simple two-player card game with a high degree of blowing-stuff-up-ness. Two players compete to take control of the hill of the game’s title by placing cards representing different military units that have specific attack and defense skills – some merely attacking an adjacent card, some able to attack deep behind enemy lines. Currently out of print, but the publisher told me they will be reprinting, perhaps with help via a Kickstarter effort. I’ve played and liked the iOS app version. Complexity: Medium-low.

39. Lords of Waterdeep. I just reviewed the app version of this game, and it apparently hews very closely to the physical version. Despite the grafted-on Dungeons and Dragons theme, it’s just a worker-placement game where players compete across eight rounds to acquire scarce resources, build buildings worth victory points, and occasionally sabotage other players. Agricola has similar mechanics and constraints, but its greater complexity makes for a more interesting game; Lords is better if you don’t want to spend an hour and a half playing one session. Complexity: Medium.

38. San Juan: Full review. The card game version of Puerto Rico, but far, far simpler, and very portable. I like this as a light game that lets you play a half-dozen times in an evening, but all it really shares with Puerto Rico is a theme and the concept of players taking different roles in each turn. It plays well with two players but also works with three or four. I get that saying this is a better game than Race for the Galaxy (they were developed in tandem before RftG split off) is anathema to most serious boardgamers, but the fact that you can pick this game up so much more easily is a major advantage in my mind, more than enough to balance out the significant loss of complexity; after two or three plays, you’ll have a pretty good idea of how to at least compete. The app version is very strong, with competent AI players and superb graphics. Complexity: Low.

37. Yspahan. Full review. I should love this moderate-strategy game that combines worker-placement, building, and trading/shipping into one fairly quick-moving game, but the need to choose and play a tight strategy from the start detracts a little from the fun value. Players compete to place goods in clusters of buildings called souks on the brightly colored game board, with completed souks worth points at the end of each of the game’s three “weeks.” Players also earn points and privileges by building up to six special buildings, and can accumulate points quickly by sending goods to the caravan – or can ship other players’ goods from souks to the caravan to screw them up. Requires at least three players. Complexity: Medium.

36. Diplomacy. Risk for grown-ups, with absolutely zero random chance – it’s all about negotiating. I wrote about the history of Diplomacy (and seven other games) for mental_floss in 2010, concluding with: “One of a handful of games (with Risk) in both the GAMES Magazine and Origin Awards Halls of Fame, Diplomacy is an excellent choice if you enjoy knife fights with your friends and holding grudges that last well beyond the final move.” I think that sums it up perfectly. I haven’t played this in a few years, unfortunately, although that’s no one’s fault but my own. Complexity: Medium.

35. Jambo. Full review. A two-player card game where the deck is virtually everything, meaning that there’s a high element of chance based on what cards you draw; if you don’t draw enough of the cards that allow you to sell and purchase wares, it’ll be hard for you to win. Each player is an African merchant dealing in six goods and must try to buy and sell them enough times to go from 20 gold at the game’s start to 60 or more at the end. We played this wrong a few times, then played it the right way and found it a little slow, as the deck includes a lot of cards of dubious value. I’ve moved this up a few spots this year after some replays, as it’s one of the best pure two-player games out there. It’s also among my favorite themes, maybe because it makes me think of the Animal Kingdom Lodge at Disneyworld. Complexity: Low.

34. Le Havre. Full review, including app. It’s a great game, one of the most complex I’ve tried, based on Agricola and Caylus (both further up this list), but my God, the setup is a bear if you’re playing the physical game, and a full game can take a few hours. I do like the game a lot on an intellectual level, but I can fully understand anyone who looks at the size and scope and says “no way.” The app version, on the other hand, removes the biggest obstacle to the game and the AI players are solid, even able to execute some niche strategies that require knowledge of the special buildings in the deck. That said, multiple plays of this (in the app version) against the two games that inspired it have shifted my opinion, to where now Le Havre seems to trade enjoyment for complexity, not an exchange I’m usually willing to make. If you think Caylus is for kids and Agricola too airy, Le Havre is the game for you. Complexity: High.

33. Flash Point: Fire Rescue Full review. A new cooperative boardgame that borrows very heavily from Pandemic but shifts to a new setting – a burning building with victims to be rescued – and includes different constraints and tools for fighting the common foe. I think Pandemic does this better, not just because Matt Leacock invented this subgenre but because the play itself, especially the way the foe (viruses) spreads across the board, so Flash Point is better if you love Pandemic and want more of the same but on a different board. Complexity: Medium.

32. Navegador. Full review. I love this game’s theme and better implementation of the explore-build-trade combination than Yspahan has, but it doesn’t work well at all with two players and really needs at least four to create enough competition on the board to make it more than just a few players playing solitaire at the same table. Players begin in Portugal with two ships apiece and have to sail to South America, around Africa, and eventually to Japan, opening up new areas, establishing colonies, building factories and shipyards, and buying and selling goods from their colonies according to fluctuating market prices. With enough players, it’s tightly competitive without feeling work-like, and the replayability comes from the interactions among players, since the game has only a miniscule amount of randomness. If you tend to game with four or five players, this would probably rank higher for you than it does for me, but I slid it down about ten spots this year because we usually play with two or three. Complexity: Medium.

31. Goa: A New Expedition. Goa had been out of print for at least five years, but there was enough of a clamor for a reprint that Z-Man Games reissued it entirely, with a small expansion included. It’s similar to two other games higher on the list, Bora Bora and Castles of Burgundy, in that players work off both a central board and individual player cards, taking resources from the central space and using them to advance tokens or development in their own play area. In Goa, the central board has a 5×5 area of tiles for players to acquire via a convoluted auction process, but after that the process is more straightforward: You’re a Portuguese spice merchant, using spices, ships, and colonists to try to build plantations and settle colonies while also increasing your production power across five separate categories on your Progress card. It offers a lot of decisions despite using just three core resources, and once you know the rules game play moves much faster. The artwork could use some help; my wife says the drawing of the merchant/colonist “looks like he wants to oppress me.” Complexity: Medium.

30. Tobago. Full review. Solid family-strategy game with a kid-friendly theme of island exploration, hidden treasures, and puzzle-solving, without a lot of depth but high replay value through a variable board. Players place clue cards in columns that seek to narrow the possible locations of four treasures on the island, with each player placing a card earning a shot at the coins in that treasure – but a small chance the treasure, like the frogurt, will be cursed. The deductive element might be the game’s best attribute. The theme is similar to that of Relic Runners but the game plays more smoothly. Complexity: Low.

29. Scotland Yard. App review. One of the few old-school games on the board, and one I’ve only played in app form. One player plays the criminal mastermind (I don’t know if he’s really a mastermind, but doesn’t he have to be for the narrative to work?) trying to escape the other players, playing detectives, by using London’s transportation network of cabs, buses, the Tube, and occasionally a boat along the Thames. It’s recommended for ages 10 and up but there’s nothing on here a clever six- or seven-year-old couldn’t handle if playing alongside an adult, and like Tobago has a strong deductive-reasoning component that makes it a little bit educational as well as fun. Complexity: Low.

28. Power Grid: Full review. This might be the Acquire for the German-style set, as the best business- or economics-oriented game I’ve found. Each player tries to build a power grid on the board, bidding on plants at auction, placing stations in cities, and buying resources to fire them. Those resources become scarce and the game’s structure puts limits on expansion in the first two “phases.” It’s not a simple game to learn and a few rules are less than intuitive, but I’m not sure I’ve seen a game that does a better job of turning resource constraints into something fun. I’d love to see this turned into an app, although the real-time auction process would make async multi-player a tough sell. Disclaimer: My wife doesn’t like this game because she says the board and cards look “depressing.” Complexity: High (or medium-high).

27. Elder Sign. Full review. Another cooperative game, this one set in the Cthulhu realm of H.P. Lovecraft’s works, Elder Sign takes a different tack on teamwork by emphasizing individual actions within the larger rubric of coordinating actions to reach a common goal. Players represent detectives seeking to rid a haunted mansion of its evil spirits, room by room, earning certain rewards while incurring risks to their health and sanity, all to take out the big foozle before he returns to life and threatens to devour them all. Player actions take place via dice rolls, but players can use their unique skills as well as various cards to alter rolled dice or reroll them entirely to try to achieve the results necessary to clear a room. There’s still a heavy luck component and you’ll probably swear at some point that Cthulhu himself has possessed the dice, but that just makes killing your supernatural enemy all the more satisfying. Complexity: Medium-low.

26. Glen More: Full review. Build your Scottish settlement, grow wheat, make whiskey. Sure, you can do other stuff, like acquire special tiles (including Loch Ness!) or acquire the most chieftains or earn victory points by trading other resources, but really, whiskey, people. The tile selection mechanic is the biggest selling point, as players move on a track around the edge of the central board and may choose to skip one or more future turns by jumping further back to acquire a better tile. It’s been in and out of print a few times already, and is probably the game on this list that gets the least press relative to its quality and fun factor. Complexity: Medium.

25. Lost Cities: Full review. This was the best two-person game we’d found, from the prolific designer Reiner Knizia, and the most portable game as well, since it can be played with nothing but the game cards. We’ve since moved on to some more complex two-player games, but for simplicity (without becoming dumb) this one is hard to top. The deck comprises 12 cards in each of five colors, including cards numbered 2 through 10 and three “investment” cards to double, triple, or quadruple the profit or loss the player earns in that color. Players take turns drawing from the deck but may only place cards in increasing order, so if you draw a green 5 after you played the 6, tough luck. You can knock out a game in 15 minutes or less, so it’s one to play multiple times in a sitting. The iOS app is very slick and plays really quickly – a great one for killing a minute while you’re waiting in line. Complexity: Low.

24.Puerto Rico: Full review. It’s grown on me, especially since I got to try it out a few times online via Tropic Euro, although I’ve had friends and readers tell me it can become monotonous after a lot of games. You’re attempting to populate and build your own island, bringing in colonists, raising plantations, developing your town, and shipping goods back to the mother country. Very low luck factor, and just the right amount of screw-your-neighbor (while helping yourself, the ultimate defense). Unfortunately, the corn-and-ship strategy is really tough to beat, reducing the game’s replay value for me. There’s a solid iOS app as well, improved after some major upgrades. Complexity: High.

23. Vikings: Full review. Currently out of print, and unavailable through that link (which I’m including anyway because used copies may appear there in the future). A very clever tile placement game in which players place island and ship tiles in their areas and then place vikings of six different colors on those tiles to maximize their points. Some vikings score points directly, but can’t score unless a black “warrior” viking is placed above them. Grey “boatsman” vikings are necessary to move vikings you’ve stored on to unused tiles. And if you don’t have enough blue “fisherman” vikings, you lose points at the end of the game for failing to feed everyone. Tile selection comes from a rondel that moves as tiles come off the board, with each space on the rondel assigning a monetary value to the tiles; tiles become cheaper as the number remaining decreases. You’re going to end up short somewhere, so deciding early where you’ll punt is key. I’m sad to see it still out of print. Complexity: Medium.

22. Morels. Full review for Paste. A 2012 release, Morels is an easy-to-learn two-player card game with plenty of decision-making and a small amount of interaction with your opponent as you try to complete and “cook” sets of various mushroom types to earn points. The artwork is impressive and the game is very balanced, reminiscent of Lost Cities but with an extra tick of difficulty because of the use of an open, rolling display of cards from which players can choose. Complexity: Low.

21. Bora Bora. One of two 2013 releases on my list, Bora Bora is one of the best-looking games we own and plays like a more complex version of the Castles of Burgundy. Two to four players compete to occupy territories on a central board of five islands, then using resources they acquire there to build on their individual player cards … but that’s just one of many ways to gain points in this game, where you can also hire natives to perform tasks or earn shells or status points, and you can trade in shells for jewelry worth points at game-end, and you can get bonuses for collecting certain combinations of cards, natives, or resources. It’s almost too much – you have so many options the game can slow down if players start overthinking it – but if you like Castles of Burgundy this is a good follow-up purchase. Complexity: Medium.

20. Thurn and Taxis: Full review. I admit to a particularly soft spot for this game, as I love games with very simple rules that require quick thinking with a moderate amount of foresight. (I don’t care for chess, which I know is considered the intellectual’s game, because I look three or four moves ahead and see nothing but chaos.) Thurn und Taxis players try to construct routes across a map of Germany, using them to place mail stations and to try to occupy entire regions, earning points for doing so, and for constructing longer and longer routes. Just don’t do what I did and play it against an operations consultant, lest you get your clock cleaned. Back in print this year and quite reasonable at about $27. Complexity: Low.

19. Through the Desert. Full app review. Another Knizia game, this one on a large board of hexes where players place camels in chains, attempting to cordon off entire areas they can claim or to connect to specific hexes worth extra points, all while potentially blocking their opponents from building longer or more valuable chains in the same colors. Very simple to learn and to set up, and like most Knizia games, it’s balanced and the mechanics work beautifully. Out of print at the moment, although I picked up a new copy back in 2011 for $10 on amazon. I’d grab the app while we wait for the physical version to come back around. Complexity: Low.

18. Orient Express: An outstanding game that’s long out of print; I’m lucky enough to still have the copy my father bought for me in the 1980s, but fans have crafted their own remakes, like this one from a Boardgamegeek user. It takes those logic puzzles where you try to figure out which of five people held which job and lived on which street and had what for breakfast and turns them into a murder mystery board game with a fixed time limit. When the Orient Express reaches its destination, the game ends, so you need to move fast and follow the clues. The publishers still sell the expansions, adding up to 30 more cases for you to solve, through this site. Complexity: Low.

17. Agricola: I gained a new appreciation for this game thanks to the incredible iOS app version developed by Playdek, which made the game’s complexity less daunting and its internal sophistication more evident. It’s very well made aside from the square animal pegs, which we replaced (at the suggestion of one of you) with actual animal-shaped pieces I bought via amazon. You’re a farmer trying to raise enough food to feed your family, but also trying to grow your family so you have more help on the farm. The core game play isn’t that complex, but huge decks of cards offering bonuses, shortcuts, or special skills make the game much more involved, and require some knowledge of the game to play it effectively. My wife felt this game felt way too much like work; I enjoyed it more than that, but it is undeniably complex and you can easily spend the whole game freaking out about finding enough food, which about a billion or so people on the planet refer to as “life.” Complexity: High.

16. Ingenious Full app review. A new addition to the list, although I only own the app rather than the physical game. It’s another Reiner Knizia title, a two-person abstract strategy game that involves tile placement but where the final scoring compares each player’s lowest score across the six tile colors, rather than his/her highest. That alters gameplay substantially, often making the ideal play seem counterintuitive, and also requires each player to keep a more careful eye on what the other guy is doing. My daughter loves this game as well. Complexity: Low.

15. Battle Line: Full review. Among the best two-player games we’ve found, designed by Reiner Knizia, who is also behind half the other games on this list. Each player tries to build formations on his/her side of the nine flags that stand in a line between him and his opponent; formations include three cards, and the various formation types resemble poker hands, with a straight flush of 10-9-8 in one color as the best formation available. Control three adjacent flags, or any five of the nine, and you win. But ten tactics cards allow you to bend the rules, by stealing a card your opponent has played, raising the bar for a specific flag from three cards to four, or playing one of two wild cards that can stand in for any card you can’t draw. There’s a fair amount of randomness involved, but playing nine formations at once with a seven-card hand allows you to diversify your risk. The iOS app is among the best as well. Complexity: Low.

14. Samurai: Full iOS app review, which is identical to the board game. I bought the physical game after a few months of playing the app, and aside from a slightly dated design and look to the pieces and the board, it’s a great game – simple to learn, complex to play, works very well with two players, plays very differently with three or four as the board expands. Players compete to place their tiles on a map of Japan, divided into hexes, with the goal of controlling the hexes that contain buddha, farmer, or soldier tokens. Each player has hex tiles in his color, in various strengths, that exert control over the tokens they show; samurai tokens that affect all three token types; boats that sit off the shore and affect all token types; and special tokens that allow the reuse of an already-placed tile or allow the player to switch two tokens on the board. Trying to figure out where your opponent might screw you depending on what move you make is half the fun. Very high replayability too. Appears to be out of print at the moment. Complexity: Medium/low.

13. Caylus. Full app review. Another game I’ve only played in its app version, Caylus is the best of the breed of highly-complex games that also includes Agricola and Le Havre, with slightly simpler rules and fewer pieces, yet the same lack of randomness and relatively deep strategy. I’ve also found the game is more resilient to early miscues than other complex strategy games, as long as you don’t screw up too badly. In Caylus, players compete for resources used to construct new buildings along one public road and used to construct parts of the main castle where players can earn points and special privileges like extra points or resources. If another player uses a building you constructed, you get a point or a resource, and in most cases only one player can build a specific building type, while each castle level has a finite number of blocks to be built. There are also high point value statues and monuments that I think are essential to winning the game, but you have to balance the need to build those against adding to the castle and earning valuable privileges. Even playing the app a dozen or more times I’ve never felt it becoming monotonous, and the app’s graphics are probably the best I’ve seen alongside those of Agricola’s. Complexity: High.

12. Small World: Full review. I think the D&D-style theme does this game a disservice – that’s all just artwork and titles, but the game itself requires some tough real-time decisions. Each player uses his chosen race to take over as many game spaces as possible, but the board is small and your supply of units runs short quickly, forcing you to consider putting your race into “decline” and choosing a new one. But when you choose a new one is affected by what you stand to lose by doing so, how well-defended your current civilization’s position is, and when your opponents are likely to go into decline. The iPad app just got a huge upgrade this past summer too. Complexity: Medium.

11. Tigris and Euphrates: Review of the iOS app. The magnum opus from Herr Knizia, a two- to four-player board game where players fight for territory on a grid that includes the two rivers of the game’s title, but where the winning player is the one whose worst score (of four) is the best. Players gain points for placing tiles in each of four colors, for having their “leaders” adjacent to monuments in those colors, and for winning conflicts with other players. Each player gets points in those four colors, but the idea is to play a balanced strategy because of that highest low score rule. The rules are a little long, but the game play is very straightforward, and the number of decisions is large but manageable. I’ve never played the physical game; the current version (sold through that amazon link) includes some minor expansions I haven’t tried. Complexity: Medium.

10. The Settlers of Catan: We don’t pull this game out as much as we did a few years ago, and I’ve still got it in the top ten largely because of its value as an introduction to Eurogames, one of the best “gateway games” on the market. Without this game, we don’t have the explosion in boardgames we’ve had in the last fifteen years. We don’t have Ticket to Ride showing up in Target, a whole wall of German-style games in Barnes & Noble, or the Cones of Dunshire on network television. Only four games on this list predate Settlers, from an era where Monopoly was considered the ne plus ultra of boardgames and you couldn’t complain about how long and awful it was because you had no basis for comparison. The history of boardgames comprises two eras: Before Catan, and After Catan. We are fortunate to be in 18 A.C.

As for the game itself, in Catan three or four players compete on a variable board of hexes to acquire different resource types, build roads and cities, and reach twelve victory points before any other player. Resources are parceled out in part according to rolls of the dice, and you can lose resources if the Robber shows up on a roll of seven and you’re not prepared for it. The Seafarers expansion balances out the core game’s low value on the wool resource, but also makes the game take about 50% longer to play. It was, and is, a great starting point if you’ve never played anything on this list, and is also one of the few games here that has some traction outside of the boardgamer culture, although that’s improving as well. There’s a brand-new expansion called Explorers and Pirates that introduces new scenarios and “missions” that add new ways to gain victory points. I haven’t picked that up, as we’ve just got lots of other games we prefer after playing this one so often over the years. Complexity: Low.

9. Pandemic: Full review. We haven’t tried many cooperative games, but this one sets a very high bar. Two to four players work together to stop global outbreaks of four diseases that spread in ways that are only partly predictable, and the balance between searching for the cures to those diseases and the need to stop individual outbreaks before they spill over and end the game creates tremendous tension that usually lasts until the very end of the event deck at the heart of the game. I haven’t tried the On The Brink expansion, but several people (including my sister and her husband) rave about what it brings to the base game. The iOS app is superb as well although it doesn’t offer online multiplayer. If you’re looking for a cooperative game you can play with kids, try Forbidden Island, from the same developer but much easier to learn and to win. Complexity: Medium.

8. Dominion: Full review. The definitive deck-building game, with no actual board. Dominion’s base set – there are four major expansions out there, including the potential standalone Dominion: Intrigue game – includes money cards, action cards, and victory points cards. Each player begins with seven money cards and three victory cards and, shuffling and drawing five cards from his own deck each turn, must add cards to his deck to allow him to have the most victory points when the last six-point victory card is purchased. I don’t think we have a multi-player game with a smaller learning curve, and the fact that the original set alone comes with 25 action cards but each game you play only includes 10 means it offers unparalleled replayability even before you add an expansion set. We own Dominion Seaside (which is outstanding) and Dominion: Alchemy (which I find a little weird), plus a standalone expansion further up this list. I can also vouch for this as appropriate for a young player – my daughter (age 6) understands the base game well enough to play it without me deliberately throwing the game to keep it competitive. Complexity: Low.

7. The Castles Of Burgundy Full review. Castles of Burgundy is the rare game that works well across its range of player numbers, as it scales well from two to four players by altering the resources available on the board to suit the number of people pursuing them. Players compete to fill out their own boards of hexes with different terrain/building types (it’s like zoning) by competiting for tiles on a central board, some of which are hexes while others are goods to be stored and later shipped for bonuses. Dice determine which resources you can acquire, but you can also alter dice rolls by paying coins or using special buildings to change or ignore them. Setup is a little long, mostly because sorting cardboard tiles is annoying, but gameplay is only moderately complex – a little more than Stone Age, not close to Caylus or Agricola – and players get so many turns that it stays loose even though there’s a lot to do over the course of one game. This was our favorite new addition in 2012 and we haven’t tried anything new since then that beats it, especially not for $27. Complexity: Medium (medium-high).

6. Jaipur: Full review. Jaipur is now our go-to two-player game, just as easy to learn but with two shades of additional complexity and a bit less randomness. In Jaipur, the two players compete to acquire collections of goods by building sets of matching cards in their hands, balancing the greater point bonuses from acquiring three to five goods at once against the benefit of taking one or two tokens to prevent the other player from getting the big bonuses. The game moves quickly due to a small number of decisions, like Lost Cities, so you can play two or three full games in an hour. It’s also incredibly portable. Complexity: Low.

5. Dominion: Intrigue. Intrigue can be combined with the base game of Dominion, but unlike other Dominion expansions (of which there are now approximately 82, with a new one released every other week, or so it seems) Intrigue is a complete game right out of the box because it includes the money and point cards. And it’s better than the original game when both are viewed without any expansions because it’s more interactive – Intrigue lives up to its name in the sense that you should spend much of your time either plotting against your neighbors or trying to defend yourself, which makes the “Big Money” strategy in the base game much less effective. The changes make the game longer, but more even, and more fun. Complexity: Medium.

4. Stone Age: Full review. Really a tremendous game, with lots of real-time decision-making but simple mechanics and goals that first-time players always seem to pick up quickly. It’s also very hard to hide your strategy, so newbies can learn through mimicry – thus forcing veteran players to change it up on the fly. Each player is trying to build a small stone-age civilization by expanding his population and gathering resources to construct buildings worth varying amounts of points, but must always ensure that he feeds all his people on each turn. The iOS app is strong – they did a nice job reimagining the board for smaller screens, too. Complexity: Medium.

3. Ticket to Ride. Full review. Actually a series of games, all working on the same theme: You receive certain routes across the map on the game board – U.S. or Europe, mostly – and have to collect enough train cards in the correct colors to complete those routes. But other players may have overlapping routes and the tracks can only accommodate so many trains. Like Dominion, it’s very simple to pick up, so while it’s not my favorite game to play, it’s my favorite game to bring or bring out when we’re with people who want to try a new game but either haven’t tried anything in the genre or aren’t up for a late night. I do recommend the 1910 expansion to anyone who gets the base Ticket to Ride game, as it has larger, easier-to-shuffle cards and offers more routes for greater replayability. We also own the Swiss and Nordic boards, which only play two to three players and involve more blocking than the U.S. and Europe games do, so I don’t recommend them. The iPad app, developed in-house, is among the best available. Complexity: Low.

2. 7 Wonders: Full review. 7 Wonders swept the major boardgame awards (yes, there are such things) in 2011, including the Spiel des Jahres, for good reason – it’s the best new game to come on the scene in a few years, combining complex decisions, fast gameplay, and an unusual mechanic around card selections where each player chooses a card from his hand and then passes the remainder to the next player. Players compete to build out their cities, each of which houses a unique wonder of the ancient world, and must balance their moves among resource production, buildings that add points, military forces, and trading. We saw no dominant strategy, several that worked well, and nothing that was so complex that we couldn’t quickly pick it up after screwing up our first game. The only negative here is the poorly written rules, but after one play it becomes far more intuitive. Plays best with three or more players, but the two-player variant works well. Complexity: Medium.

1. Carcassonne. Full review. The best-of-breed iOS app has only increased my appreciation for Carcassonne, a game I still play regularly by myself, with my wife and daughter, and with friends here or online. It brings ease of learning, tremendous replayability (I know I use that word a lot here, but it does matter), portability (you can put all the tiles and meeples in a small bag and stuff it in a suitcase), and plenty of different strategies and room for differing styles of play. You build the board as you go: Each player draws a tile at random and must place it adjacent to at least one tile already laid in a way that lines up any roads or cities on the new tile with the edges of the existing ones. You get points for starting cities, completing cities, extending roads, or by claiming farmlands adjacent to completing cities. It’s great with two players, and it’s great with four players. You can play independently, or you can play a little offense and try to stymie an opponent. The theme makes sense. The tiles are well-done in a vaguely amateurish way – appealing for their lack of polish. And there’s a host of expansions if you want to add a twist or two. We own the Traders and Builders expansion, which I like mostly for the Builder, an extra token that allows you to take an extra turn when you add on to whatever the Builder is working on, meaning you never have to waste a turn when you draw a plain road tile if you sit your Builder on a road. We also have Inns and Cathedrals, which we’ve only used once; it adds some double-or-nothing tiles to roads and cities, a giant meeple that counts as two when fighting for control of a city/road/farm, as well as the added meeples needed to play with a sixth opponent. Complexity: Low/medium-low for the base game, medium with expansions.

A few games we haven’t played enough for me to rank: Friday, a one-player card game I’ve enjoyed but need to play a few more times; Blokus
, an abstract strategy game I’ve only played with my daughter so far, although it seems best suited to four-player play; Agricola: All Creatures Big and Small, a two-player spinoff game that felt a little too lightweight; Love Letter, a game involving only a deck of sixteen cards but that plays poorly with fewer than four people; and the highly-rated deckbuilding game Android: Netrunner, which we just could not get the hang of, as it might have the most complex and/or worst-written rules I’ve ever encountered. I’ll also be reviewing the new Days of Wonder title Relic Runners next week for Paste magazine, but didn’t include it here because that hasn’t been published yet.

And, as with last year, my rankings of these games by how they play with just two players:

1. Jaipur
2. Carcassonne
3. Stone Age
4. Ticket to Ride
5. Dominion/Intrigue
6. Small World
7. Battle Line
8. Samurai
9. Castles of Burgundy
10. Morels
11. Ingenious
12. Lost Cities
13. Pandemic
14. 7 Wonders
15. Through the Desert
16. San Juan
17. Jambo
18. Thurn und Taxis
19. Orient Express
20. Tigris and Euphrates
21. Elder Sign
22. Tobago
23. Battle for Hill 218
24. Asara
25. Maori

Top Chef, S11E09.

If you’re here, allow me to plug my updated guide to gifts for cooks. Also, I held an hourlong Klawchat today.

We get a glimpse of the inside of the chefs’ house’s fridge, which is full of Philly cream cheese, probably because no one with any kind of taste wants to eat that crap.

* Padma is wearing … a kimono? I’m not even sure what that is. I approve, though.

* No Quickfire this episode because it’s Restaurant Wars (woot). The guest judge is David Chang, who says chefs should “plan on everything that can go wrong,” making it clear that he at least has watched the show before. There will also be a table of Chase Sapphire cardmembers, whom they’re calling VIPs even though it’s likely these people are just as excited that Olive Garden is going to start serving hamburgers. They’ll be sitting with Danny Meyer, though, who knows a thing or two about opening restaurants – and about good hamburgers.

* Nicholas says his team, which includes Travis, Carrie, Stephanie, and Brian, is like “the Bad News Bears,” compared to the Green team, which has more challenge wins under its belt with Nina, Shirley, Justin, Sara, and Carlos. We’ll see about that.

* The Green team has an eclectic bunch of styles, which would be fine if any of them was willing to listen to anyone else on the team. Sara is making financiers and is handed front-of-house duties by acclamation. Justin volunteers to be executive chef, then congratulates himself on his courage for doing so. The team seems far more focused on things like flatware and decor than on its menu, though.

* The Purple team (the Bad News Bears) actually discusses its menu, unlike the Green team, with a seafood focus. Nicholas takes executive duties. Travis offers to do front-of-house duties, saying “gays belong in the front of the house. Duh!” Okay then.

* The Green team is still discussing décor. If the food sucks, decor won’t save you. Has anyone ever survived just on look and feel? Or lost Restaurant Wars because of it? The car can be beautiful but if the brakes fail, you’re still gonna die.

* Meanwhile, Carlos points out that, you know, this being Top Chef and not Top Design (which was an actual show, and not a good one), they should maybe talk about the food, at which point Justin shuts him down in front of everyone. If Carlos had stood up in front of Justin and called him out on it, he would have been right – and Justin probably would have backed down. That was bully-like behavior and it was chickenshit. Carlos made an actual point, that you can’t pick your dishes if you don’t know what you’re cooking – this is known as “foreshadowing,” kids – but Justin pulled non-existent rank on him.

* The teams split up to go to Restaurant Depot and Whole Foods. Sara wanted ring molds from Restaurant Depot but her teammates say there weren’t any. I’ve been in a Restaurant Depot once and I am pretty sure I know where ring molds and things like that were. Sara’s wondering if her team didn’t look hard enough … and she’s probably right.

* Justin pulls the same stunt again when Sara questions whether a 12-cup coffeemaker will be enough for 120 diners, saying that she should just “be positive.” Hard to say this might just be editing – his tone and body language are both terrible here.

* Brian got xanthan gum instead of agar agar. I may have missed when he picked that up, but I know Bob’s Red Mill makes xanthan gum and it’s sold at Whole Foods – and the bag says “XANTHAN GUM” in hard-to-miss lettering. The right move here would be to make something different, no?

* We see Travis and Sara training the wait staff, and it was interesting to see the contrast between this and the results. Sara seemed to command attention more, to be specific in what she wanted, to keep her posture up and project her voice, and so on. Travis was kind of goofy, swinging his arms, joking about how the restaurant wasn’t set up yet … but he ended up with a much more disciplined and organized service than Sara did. He did lead by example on the floor far more than Sara did, which could have been a major factor.

* Shocker: Justin doesn’t have the bowls he wanted and is yelling at Shirley about it. Carlos is wearing his best “I told you so” face in the background.

* Danny Meyer is sitting with the Sapphire people. I wonder if they realize what a big deal this is. This is the man who brought the world Shake Shack; he’s an icon.

* David Chang on order in the kitchen: “You can’t run it like a democracy. It needs to be a totalitarian state back there.” What’s the kitchen equivalent to a prison labor camp? Chopping onions?

* The food starts to come out to the judges on the Purple side … Brian made a scallop crudo with purple corn gel and a corn and squash relish. Chang says the gel is “too snotty.” Well that was an evocative description.

* Steph, in the confessional, offers maybe the highest praise I’ve ever seen a contestant offer a competitor: “Nick has such a handle on expediting. However he’s doing it should never ever change for the rest of his life.”

* Meanwhile, on the Green team’s side, it’s a hot mess, first figuratively then literally. The Sapphire table (with Meyer) didn’t get menus. The waitstaff is turning in tickets that look nothing like the format Justin described. Food is going to the wrong tables. They’re not just going down in flames. This is Krakatau.

* More food – Stephanie made a linguini with oyster cream, caviar, and fennel. Everyone loves how she cooked the pasta and Gail loves the salty/briny kick from the caviar.

* Carrie does a sauteed gulf shrimp with chickpea puree, lemon, oregano, and shrimp butter. Her shrimp were overcooked and the butter sauce may have separted, leaving an oil slick on the plate.

* Nick’s dish was a roasted black drum (a large, bottom-feeding fish found along the east/southeast coast) with king trumpet mushrooms, oxtail ragu, and a kale and hibiscus reduction. Chang loves the flavors. Gail praises him for using a local fish and pairing a meaty fish with a bold sauce. I’m just wondering what a kale and hibiscus reduction would taste like.

* Travis’ dessert is an olive oil cake with greek yogurt, pistachios, and cherry coulis. His gel turns out way better than Brian’s, but I don’t think they told us what he used to create the gel. Other than the cake perhaps not being moist enough, this gets high marks too.

* Meanwhile, the Green team’s runners are confused, Sara is busing tables, and when she greets the judges she looks like she just went a few rounds with Laila Ali. The Sapphire table is actually still eating there, having just gotten their entrees at the time they were supposed to be leaving to go to the Purple team’s restaurant.

* Padma asks Sara for their first courses, never a good sign. Sara never wrote out their tickets, calling them out to Justin et al instead. This would be more foreshadowing.

* Sara serves the starters without explaining the dishes! Has she never seen the show before?

* Carlos’s starter is a red snapper crudo with avocado mousse, pickled baby carrots, and fried platanos. The fish is cut poorly, which kind of ruins the whole thing.

* Justin’s agnolotti with roasted parsnip, mississippi rabbit, and collard green broth is awful (per Tom) and was served on a flat plate when it should have been a narrow bowl (who saw that coming?).

* Shirley made an olive oil-poached cobia (a firm-textured, warm-water fish also called black salmon), blanched ong choy (water spinach) fried in shrimp paste, and salsa verde. David says it’s delicious and that the star of the show is the shrimp paste. Tom agrees. So she ain’t going home.

* Nina made a pork tenderloin with sunchokes and trumpet royale mushrooms. Really nice, nicely cooked, crispy pancetta on the outside, yata yata, we knew she wasn’t going home either.

* The literal hot mess occurs when Sara’s mascarpone emulsion broke in the heat of the kitchen. I don’t get this: One, don’t you keep any dairy emulsion cool, such as by sitting it in a larger bowl of cool water or a towel soaked in cold water? And two, can’t you restart the emulsion by whisking it bit by bit into a bit of cool water?

* Sara’s dessert is, predictably, a disaster: a nectarine brown butter cake with moscato nectarine salsa. Gail calls it a “weird greasy cookie.” The five-spice mascarpone was on the menu, so Padma asks for it, and Sara has to admit she botched it.

* The stew room fakeout was just cruel. Padma says, “Both teams got psyched out by restaurant wars.” Come on. If the Purple team screwed up anything major, we didn’t see it.

* So the Purple team was the winning restaurant, of course. Tom praises Travis, and Padma says his was the best front-of-house ever on Top Chef. You’d think chefs considering going on this show in the future would save this episode and rewatch it a few hundred times. He didn’t do anything (on camera, at least) that couldn’t be replicated. Yet someone next season will pull a Sara and forget to describe the dishes (except her own!) to the judges.

* Pretty much all praise here except on Brian’s purple corn gel, where he had a chance to admit the ingredient error and instead clams up. I’m not a big fan of that – it was a simple mistake, and a potential learning experience, so just own up to it. He clearly wasn’t going home anyway since the team won.

* Nick wins the overall challenge as the executive chef and author of a dish the judges loved; it was clearly him or Travis, whose dish the judges also liked. I would imagine the judges, especially Tom, were impressed by how tightly the team worked with each other. Nick’s leadership ruled the day. And I don’t think he ever yelled at or bullied anyone.

* Then the Green team comes in and Sara is just floundering in front of the judges, denying that anything went that wrong and apologizing as her pat, disinterested answer to every criticism. She and Justin start sparring over the systemic breakdown in the tickets; her verbal fire of the judges’ orders seems to be what sinks her here. Justin is going to skate on all of his own errors here, clearly, even though his dish was also a mess. He and Sara agree that one of them has to be the eliminated chef.

* Padma says “that was pretty illuminating” after the Green team leaves, to which Gail adds, accurately, that it was “depressing, actually.” Did bad service cause the kitchen breakdown? Gail says the food was bad either way. I don’t know how you could sort any of this out if you were at that judges’ table.

* Sara is eliminated, of course. She says she focused too much on everything but the “culinary side” … but she didn’t do any of that non-culinary stuff well either.

* LCK: Louis against Sara in an amusing if very silly challenge: They had to use mascarpone in a savory preparation, but for the middle third of their thirty-minute cooking time, they had to turn over the cooking to a sous chef from the peanut gallery and give orders while blindfolded. Louis seemed to win handily by using the mascarpone in an unusual way – he poached fish in it and used it to bind a vegetable side – while Sara just put it in polenta, which can be delicious but isn’t creative at all.

* The rankings, one through nine: Nick, Shirley, Nina, Carrie, Justin, Brian, Stephanie, Carlos, Travis. Nick moves up to the top spot on a strong week and a general upward trend over the last few weeks. Carlos takes the biggest tumble; his execution is a consistent issue, and the fact that he has no formal culinary training may be hurting him in a competition that so frequently asks chefs to show breadth of ability as well as depth.

Bora Bora.

I published a lot of content for ESPN Insiders the last 48 hours, including:

That’s all on moves that have already occurred, but I’ll continue posting this week as more stuff breaks.

One of our favorite new games of the past few years is 2011’s The Castles of Burgundy, which is one of the few games we’ve come across that brought an entirely new approach to the somewhat stale game styles like worker placement. The rules are lengthy but gameplay isn’t complex, and the game works a lot of decision-making into under an hour of playing time. It’s been a modest hit, rating very highly at Board Game Geek (12th overall) as well as with me, so it’s unsurprising that we’re now seeing other games with similar mechanics come along, such as the brand-new Ravensburger relase Bora Bora, a beautifully rendered game that borrows much from Castles of Burgundy but adds a new setting and a few minor twists.

In Bora Bora, two to four players set about building huts on the five islands on the game board so they can collect resources from the land and hire natives to perform various tasks, all with the goal of acquiring victory points to be tallied after the game’s six rounds. There are numerous ways to rack up these points, such as converting natural resources to buildings on your player board, placing priests in the central board’s temple, completing a task tile at the end of a round, buying jewelry with shells, or gaining status points in each round. Most point acquisitions come through a series of moves; for example, hiring a female native gets you shells, with which you can buy a piece of jewelry that is worth from 1 to 9 victory points at the end of the game, or that can be used to fulfill certain task tiles. Gaining natural resources helps you place a two-space building on the twelve-space building area on your player card, a move that is worth 10 points in the game’s first two rounds but just 4 points in the final two rounds.


The central board during the final round of play.

A round in Bora Bora comprises three phases: Rolling dice to place them on action tiles; using your natives for actions; and a scoring/roundup phase where the main board is refreshed with new native and task tiles. Your moves are dictated by dice rolls, as in Castles of Burgundy, although Bora Bora offers fewer ways to manipulate the dice. In Bora Bora, each player has his/her own set of three dice and can place those dice on any of five (for a two-player game) to seven (four-player) master tiles that allow actions like hiring a native, expanding to a different region on the map, or placing a priest in the temple. The wild card of those actions is the “helper” option, where the number on the die you place there converts into points you can use to gain shells or status points from workers, resources without having to expand your territory, or god cards and offerings to let you do more with your dice. Two players can use the same tile in a round, but a player may only place a die on a tile if the die’s roll is lower than all dice currently on the tile, creating a trade-off between using a high die roll on a tile to get more powers or resources and using a lower die to block your opponent(s) from using the same one.

The one way to tweak the dice in your favor is through pleading with the gods using god cards and offering tiles. There are five god card types, two of which allow you to change the way you use the dice: You can play a die normally but treat its face value as six for your move; you can place a die on a master tile even if it’s not lower than all dice currently on it. Other god cards allow you to score points for expanding into a new territory on the map, to employ additional natives during the action phase of a turn, or to help you complete a task tile on your card for which you just fall short of the requirements.

The task tiles turn out to be more significant as the game goes on because they offer additional bonuses of four to six points for things you may already have done, such as expanding to all five islands or having certain combinations of natives or resources already on your card. The end of the game offers even more bonuses for achieving the maximum number of something, like completing nine tasks, buying six jewelry tiles, or filling all twelve spaces on the building area on your card (called the “ceremony spaces” in a confusing bit of nomenclature).

Bora Bora suffers a little from its similarity to Castles of Burgundy, but also from pushing too far in the same general direction as its predecessor – players have so many options that gameplay can drag while you try to sort through them all. It’s easy to become paralyzed by all of the options before you because of how long-lasting some fo the effects can be; Castles of Burgundy doesn’t have that same depth, and it means Bora Bora has more in common with games like Agricola or Le Havre, where a decision in an early round can filter down through the rest of the game. It’s an ideal game to pick up if you love Castles of Burgundy but want something different or more complex, or if you are partial to games with great-looking components, since Bora Bora has bright colors and strong artwork. The extent of possible options for players and constant references to the rule book to explain the pictograms on certain tiles stretched the game out for us to the point where we’re going to reach for Castles of Burgundy first, but this represents a solid change of pace.

I wanted to slip in one more game review before posting my updated rankings later this week, so look for that post either later on Thursday or at worst on Friday, as long as the baseball world doesn’t go bananas again. You can see last year’s top 40 rankings while you wait.