I played Acquire again recently.
A five word review, 'I played Acquire again recently,' sums it up nicely. The game's forty years old, still in print. Still being played. How many games do I play from ten years ago? Earlier today I was looking through old Sumos. These cover '89 to '95. I just glanced through the first half ... I started gaming in '92. Sumo mentioned at least twenty games I've bought, only to sell later. Maybe ten I still own (possibly altered). Around fifty titles that register dimly, or mean nothing to me.
If Acquire doesn't mark the start of Euros, I'm not sure what does. Constrained choices — you don't roll and move. You pick your play from one of six choices. After that, you can buy up to three shares — an action point (or time) constraint. Acquire lasts an hour and change. And it's constructive — you build up instead of tearing down. It's very hard to end up worse than you started, even if you come in dead last. An American game that presaged the revolution in those games of ours by a quarter century.
Acquire, of course, has it's famous controversy — "Open or closed holdings." It doesn't really matter. The game plays fine.
What if Acquire were released today? Has the revolution overtaken it? Perhaps, although the flaws have been magnified by time. A bad draw can find yourself shut out of mergers until all hope is gone. With closed holdings, a simple miscount can cost you the game.
But even after all these years, I wonder when to start a cheap company instead of an expensive one. Or when to take that one extra share, to discourage a fight. When to give up on first place because cash is running low. There's something here. It's solid. We recognize it. Would Acquire be famous if it came out today? No, of course not. It would be a sleeper, sneaking up on people. It's not flashy. Perhaps it was a sleeper, I don't know.
I played Acquire again. For many games I've owned or written about (some quite recently), I'll never play again and won't miss. Does Acquire deserve it's status as a classic? Absolutely.
Related Posts (on one page):
You know, that's a fun little puzzle. How do you finish Acquire with less money than you started?
You've just inspired a Geeklist...
This might dictate not buying early shares, but wait for the late chains that are obviously doomed to not return to the table.
It also could be pretty cutthroat if everyone is trying to do this, with the goal of finishing with the least money.
I agree. I meant to say that the best Eurogames surpass it. But I'm not aware of an older board game that's better. (Traditional games like Chess, Go &Bridge excepted). The rank and file games published since are nowhere near as good.
If you don't allow people to hold onto shares (knowing that the company can't restart), then it's hard to lose moeny. YOu have to manage some very poor 2:1 trades. But holding on too long is an easy way to lose out...
Sure, but that's another rule change, and even without it I don't think it is as easy as you think.
If a chain you've bought shares in merges another chain into it, it immediately becomes a threat to get to 11 and stay on the board. If that happens you've tragically made money. Also, if you concentrate on a few chains that are definitely going out, the chances of getting 1st or 2nd go up.
To lose money isn't too difficult, to minimize your money is a challenge.