With the release of the 2nd Ed. forthcoming (sorry, no firm dates yet), it’s great to see that people are still talking about the game and appreciating it.
Bruno Faidutti (prolific French designer of Citadels fame pictured above, in caricature form) writes a comparison between Belfort and Lords of Waterdeep, the new hotness, on his website. Both are quite similar games, mechanically – one laced with anachronistic medieval humour, the other with old-school D&Disms.
In his March 2012 Editorial, Bruno writes:
Both are well designed games, and cleverly manage to bring meeple placement into fantasy US-style gaming. In my opinion, however, Belfort is clearly the best game, mostly because gamers’ interaction is more effective. In Belfort, all the players have the same goal, and these goals are clearly stated, so competition is fierce and sometimes nasty. Lords of Waterdeep is full of apparently nasty action cards, but there are both too many elements on the board and around it to take care of, and too many hidden cards in the players’ hands, which means that these cards are often played more to get some immediate advantage than to hinder opponents.
Don’t take me wrong. I didn’t dislike Lords of Waterdeep. But, clearly, the game I’m going to keep and play again a few times is certainly Belfort. On the other hand, Lords of Waterdeep seems to be the rage on the Geek at the moment, while Belfort has good ratings but went largely unnoticed.