I always admire Martin Wallace’s ideas for board games. While, sometimes, his creations often emit an aura of high complexity, not all of them are for expert gamers, strictly speaking. My gaming group seems to have developed a tad of PTSD every damn time I announce that I have brought a game of his along. That is… Probably my fault. After all, their first introduction to his titles was that Brass: Birmingham right away.
With that said, Steam Power is quite different. It is one of the more accessible title he has ever published.
Trains and cities
Steam Power brings trains into the thematic spotlight with an easy core concept to grasp. We then need to build the rail lines. They connect cities, and meanwhile, constructing factories in those cities. These factories produce resources essential for fulfilling contracts, the primary way to earn Victory Points in the game.
As we deplete the resources produced by a factory, the player who owns that particular factory can claim additional points from the city where it stands. And that’s Steam Power in a nutshell. We have a blend of network building, a sort of pick-and-deliver, and resource management.
So, we do have a streamlined train game in Steam Power. One that’s highly accessible even. Compared to Brass: Birmingham, the network-building mechanic remains intact, where we construct railways to connect cities, transfer and make use of resources. Yet, this game trims away the more economic aspects and the technology tree. It reduces the intricacies. Which, in the end, makes the game more approachable.
I really enjoy the way Steam Power encourages the shared use of resources produced by factories. Any player can spend these resources, even if he/she is not the one who built the factory. Naturally, this implementation raises a certain question. Is it worthwhile to invest in factory at all? All players are getting the advantage out of it.
Not surprisingly, the answer is a resounding yes. Especially when our factory stands in a strategic city connected to as many players’ railways possible. Because the moment the resource in that factory is depleted, the owner scores points for it. It’s a hefty point generation, too.
Contracts and Victory Points
Another way to rack up points in Steam Power is through contract fulfilment. This is arguably the most frequent scoring method in the game. It’s straightforward and easy. We spend the specified resources depicted on the contract cards and reap the rewards. Period. Nevertheless, players cannot just hoard contract cards to complete them all later on in one go.
Martin deliberately restricts players to fulfilling one contract only per action. Initially, I thought this was an extended measure to curb stockpiling the contract. It does, actually. But on a deeper inspection, we can see it as a thoughtful design choice. Let’s take a what-if situation, where an action allows player to fulfil as many contracts as wanted. With the endgame triggered when one player has fulfilled a set number of contracts, Steam Power will lose its balance.
A single player could just hoard a pile of contracts, build up a robust network of railway links to multiple factories — even without building the factories itself — and then suddenly snap. All contracts that have been piled up are completed in a single action. Leaving all factories dry. And it also brings the game to an abrupt and unsatisfying end, because other players don’t have equal and fair chance to respond or catch up.
Despite this strength in contract implementation, I find the randomness in drawing the contract cards a bit unfortunate. There’s little to no mitigation when luck doesn’t favour us. Perhaps, an open-drafting mechanic could have improved this experience? With this, Steam Power could offer us more agency and more opportunity to craft long-term plans,
That said, Steam Power still brings up a great deal of depth in other area. Take the network building, for instance. Martin introduces a variable cost system, which, for the tiny bits, is also thematically fitting. Building the railways across different terrains comes with varying cost — of course, it’s naturally more expensive and harder to lay tracks through hills and mountains compared to just plain, flat area. A small touch, but meaningful.
The endgame
Money, in dollars, in Steam Power serves as a mere currency. Well, it’s slightly relevant to the VP — just a slight because every $5 translates to 1 VP in the end. At least it’s enabling a way to squeeze some extra points in the final stretch. Still, I can’t help but think how much more challenging the game might feel if the winning condition revolved around the amount of money left at the end of the game. Steam Power would become a great economy game for casual gamers. Of course, that would require more tweaking in the rewards from factories and contracts.
Steam Power, in the end, clearly targets more casual gamers — it also fits for those stepping into the euro game segment. Martin Wallace offers a gateway game into the genre. We see a lighter competition and manageable complexity in Steam Power.
It is intentionally avoids the heavier and more intricate designs like the aforementioned Brass: Birmingham, or even the sprawling 18xx series — the Age of Steam. Instead, we have it aligned in the same league with approachable classics. Ticket to Ride is a close comparison to this, for example.
It’s a decent game to pick when we want to play with less hardcore gamers. Steam Power is definitely not a heavy euro game. It’s not even on-par, complexity-wise, with the medium-weight euro. The game sits in the lighter, easy-to-chew category. The moment this game hits the retail and becomes widely available, I anticipate Steam Power earning a spot as a solid contender for another family game in our shelf.
I am a full-time food technologist during weekdays. However, when the calendar hits weekends, I transform into an avid board gamer. I am a hardcore Legend of the Five Rings (L5R) LCG player from Fantasy Flight Games (FFG). Current hobby: buying board games. My shelf of shame’s list is getting longer, thanks to you, Kickstarter.
DE 
EN