Steel Driver
You can’t swing a dice bag at a game convention – any gaming get-together, really –without swatting a segment of attendees who get way, way into train games. In spite of the ostensibly narrow focus of the subject matter, these pastimes pop up with amazing regularity. Warfrog has released another such game, Steel Driver, to cater to this devoted fanbase. It covers the race to build the railroads in the late-19th century, and has players positioning themselves to collect the most valuable returns on goods by the end of the game. Three to six rail barons take turns auctioning off control of and shares in one of the six companies laying down track. They then buy up the rail lines printed on the board, trying to connect cities advantageously. After five rounds there’s a final scoring for the goods bought in each town, and the one with the most money wins.
There’s not a great deal new about the method of play – spend money, buy tracks, connect cities – but there are a few twists included to separate it from other train games. Ownership and control of the lines depends on who last invested money, for example, not who has the most stock. Like a lot of Martin Wallace designs, there’s almost a sort of minigame at the end of the “main” game, this one involving getting sets of goods to boost the company’s stock during final scoring. Unfortunately this is more trouble than it’s worth, so while the product is a love letter to fans of the genre, the end game requires a mind-boggling ability to think ahead.
The board displays the United States, highlighting major cities and the routes between them. Each route has a cost, and the cities themselves are rated with a dollar value. Players get investment cubes, white wooden blocks that represent the capital they have to spend. Everyone gets the same amount each turn, though one can hold back on expenses so he has more to spend on a subsequent turn. These captains of industry take turns initiating auctions for control over one of the six rail lines (which don’t get names; they’re distinguished by color). The high bidder takes the company control marker (an engine-shaped block) and one of the wooden disks from that railroad’s box on the board – the latter is a share in the company, and it’s worth cash as the game progresses.
In place of these things, the player puts his bid on that box; the cubes he spent to get control for the turn become the company’s investment capital. Once all six have been taken over, the folks in charge of the rail’s fate take turns buying routes. The number printed along each path on the board is how many cubes it costs to build that segment – the more the winner spent to take control, the more rail he can buy. He has to take the line as far as it can afford to go, but any capital that cannot be spent is saved for the next turn. When a baron buys a piece of track, the connected city’s value is added to the company’s stock. For example, the Denver space says $40, so when it’s connected to a railroad the stock goes up that much, at least for that turn.
Once all the money has been spent, everyone rakes in a return on their investment. Anyone with stock in a company receives money equal to its current value. Then all the stocks return to zero (in the short term, a company is only as good as last turn’s investor) and another round is played. After five turns, the game is over . . . sort of. There’s no more track buying, but whoever has the most stock in a particular color gets control of it. One goods cube is now placed in each city, and these are the products that see transportation via that railroad. Once more in turn order, the CEO of each line takes one such good from any city to which his company is connected. There’s only one cube in each town, and at this point there may be one train running through it or several. If someone has the sole transport through a burgh he gets its good, but those with competitors are up for grabs. The object is to make sets of these goods for each rail, because bigger sets are worth more. One product is only worth $10 but a second kind is worth another $20 for a total of $30; this progresses to $150 for five different colored cubes. The value of these sets is how much one stock is now worth. Once the money is paid out this final time, the richest player wins.
Now if this sounds confusing it’s only because it is. A brief overview doesn’t allow it to sound really maddening. In truth it’s not all that hard in practice: investment buys control, the controller builds track with that capital, connected cities raise a stock’s value so it pays the money, and that wins the game. But there’s a strategy for the short term and another for the long view. Since a rail’s value resets each turn, buying into many cities is the best way to get a return on one’s investment right now. But goods of various colors are regional creatures (orange in the West, black in the South, etc.), so at the end of the game getting a set of all five cubes is easier if your track reaches across the nation. Of course you can simply bid on stocks for companies that look successful thanks to the efforts of other barons, but trying to get large dollar amounts while positioning your favored roads to collect big dividends during the end game, well . . . either it’s impossible or it requires a slavish devotion to the subject matter.
There are no worries with the component mix. Most everything is made of wood, the money is okay, and the pawns are sizable. On the other hand, the little boxes printed on the board for each rail company are pitifully small. There’s no good way to get the control marker, stock disks, and current investment cubes onto those spaces (their rail markers for claiming a route are, thankfully, supposed to go into a big multihued pile beside the board). And just FYI, Peter Dennis’ cover illustration of John Henry doesn’t really have anything in particular to do with the game outside his legendary “steel-drivin’ man” status. Apparently, as hard as it is to come up with a new variation on train games it’s even harder to make the box for same stand out from the pack.
And that may be the intention. Wallace in his designer notes (oddly the most compelling part of the game – as brief as it is, it’s worth a read just for a little insight into how a game company operates) says it’s an update of Prairie Railroads (and that he intends to release five rail games in as many years, so we may find ourselves back here again in 12 months). The complications might appeal to someone looking to switch the focus in a train game from the building to the buying, but outside this group it’s a harder sell. It lacks the mass appeal of a Ticket to Ride or an Empire Builder, but even then anyone not used to parallel computing in their heads is swimming upstream. Steel Driver isn’t so notable for its investment elements that it begs to be bought by any but the completist of the group, requiring as it does the utmost of mental strain just to accommodate an out-of-control twist to the rules.
May 10th, 2009 at 15:59
Just out of curiosity, have you played Chicago Express, Andy? If so, what do you think of it. I gather the two games are branches of the same family tree, and I’m curious if your distaste is for Steel Driver specifically, or this entire style of train game.
Heck, Ticket to Ride is barely a train game in many gamers’ books, compared to the Empire Builder games or 18xx (which I have no experience with) or the Prairie Railroads series.
May 18th, 2009 at 17:27
Hey, Gerald. Yes, I got the chance to play Chicago Express, and I enjoyed that quite a bit. I see what you mean about the similarities. Though it has like twists; some forethought is required; and one must balance short- and long-term mechanics, I think it’s easier to visualize the endgame with Express than it is with Steel Driver, (and easier to make the necessary connections during the game). My two cents, anyway.
And hey, thanks for the comment.
July 15th, 2009 at 23:21
Nice review. For me, 2 features of Steel Driver really attracts me. 6 players possible (and yet playable in quick time and downtime does not seem significant) and the interesting ‘endgame’ which once played before, becomes a very interesting strategy in future games not just about majority control but even single stock investments to maximise profits.
July 16th, 2009 at 20:45
Hey, Chooi. Thank you for the compliment, and for taking time to read and comment. Yeah, it’s pretty rare to see a six-player these days, which is probably one reason Steel Driver still sees a lot of play at my group’s table. I don’t always join, but at least I know it’s a quick play if I do, as you say.