We brought Blood Rage to the table last night. I'm not sure how I feel about the game -- losing the dice, slow progression, and radically different factions allows for a faster and cleaner than Chaos in the Old World, but also one with a markedly different feel.
For those who are unfamiliar, Blood Rage is rocketing up the BGG rankings (released last month, currently #12 thematic, #64 strategic, #144 overall) for rational reasons: it's a thematic Euro with Viking dudes on a map fighting and pillaging to gain glory before Ragnarok designed by FFG veteran Eric Lang and packing in a lot of detailed minis. Mechanically, it heavily features area control/combat and card drafting/play. It's also marketed/reviewed as an iterative design upon Lang's previous work on Midgard and Chaos in the Old World. These are all winning concepts.
Blood Rage is played over three rounds. Each round begins with a card draft (deal out eight cards to each player, then pick a card and pass the remainder left, repeating until six cards are selected). Some of the drafted cards are unit/faction upgrades, some are quests that provide rewards at the end of the round if particular conditions are met (have most strength in a particular province, have 4 dead units), and some are combat modifiers. Each player then takes actions in turn order -- placing dudes on the map, calling pillage/combat, or playing drafted cards -- until everyone runs out of action points ("rage") or passes. Calling pillage triggers allows units adjacent to the province to be pillaged to be brought in by their respective players and if there are multiple players' units in the province (or ships in the adjacent fjord) after this step, combat occurs. It's a simple matter of unit strength + simultaneously revealed combat modifier card (although some have text abilities; all in all rather similar to combat in Game of Thrones). The winner of the combat loses the card played, but wins VP. The loser loses all units in the province (and adjacent ships). If the winner is also the player who called pillage, the winner gains the reward printed on the pillage tile for the province. All of that is relatively straightforward.
The meat of the game lies in the card drafting/play and the ordering of actions. Do you want to build your clan so that it earns rewards for losing battles/sacrificing units? Or do you want to focus on questing and having dudes remaining on the map? Or are you going to go all in on winning combat with your leader unit and chain-pillaging? Each of the eight provinces can only be pillaged once per round (and one province is removed from play each round), so there aren't that many opportunities for pillaging/combat. Are you going to play your clan upgrades first and risk having other players pillage in the meantime? Or are you going to spam those cheap units? Or do you want to play the zero-cost quest cards and come in late to avoid combat?
At the end of our game, the winner wound up with a score of 250 glory (scoring heavily in the last round with the combinations of Odin's Thone + 3 quests and Frigga's Domain + ships that earned 12 VP upon destruction). Two others were around 130 (through a couple quests and standard track/combat scoring). The last player resigned at the start of the second round upon determining that winning was hopeless based on the first round's play.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I was hoping that the two players who disliked/hated Chaos in the Old World would find Blood Rage to their liking. And indeed they did. So mission accomplished? I'm not so sure. I've grown a bit tired of games like Agricola and Seasons, which are effectively short card drafting games padded out with a ton of rote gameplay. Blood Rage is similar; any sort of long-term strategy is decided by the draft. The time in between is filled with the tactical (and a bit AP-prone) ordering of actions. Here there's much more of an emphasis on timing and ordering of actions (given that combat/pillaging can be called at any time, rather than just at the end of the round). Of course, the draft is a huge component of Blood Rage as well, whereas selecting upgrade cards in CitOW was quite obvious. The structure of Blood Rage means that the third (final) round is one of massive scoring potential, greatly overshadowing the prior two, unlike CitOW in which every round mattered.
Perhaps the most obvious difference between CitOW and Blood Rage is the theme. I don't really know much about Warhammer, but the asymmetric factions with their own abilities, win/dial conditions, and cards really made the game interesting from the very start. Each player in Blood Rage starts off with a functionally identical clan and only by late game do the differences have a chance to emerge. Additionally, whereas in CitOW Tzeentch would be playing cards to move Khorne's warriors into populous areas to slaughter Nurgle's cultists while Slaanesh would be converting enemy units to his own side to deny others dial advancements, in Blood Rage the necessity/ability of keeping other players in check is much reduced; here you're out for yourself, first and foremost. And to be honest, although I profess a disdain for dice-based combat, it works pretty well in CitOW. And it's certainly more exciting than Blood Rage's GoT-esque approach.
In short, Blood Rage is certainly competent, but it makes me appreciate Chaos in the Old World all the more.