Underwater Cities

I do not need to dress this up much: for me, Underwater Cities is top-tier. The session thoroughly confirmed my first impression that I clearly prefer it with three players. It does not fall apart at four at all; it is simply at three that it has the tighter, more competitive feel I want most.

The core of the tension lies in the action spaces. With three players, there is no duplicate action slot, so every choice matters more: if someone takes the space I wanted, there is no comfortable duplicate space to let me carry on as if nothing happened.

That makes the interaction more immediate, without my needing to claim anything more complicated than the session showed. The cut-offs are harsher at three, decisions around the available actions carry more weight, and the flow at the table becomes noticeably tighter than it is at four.

So yes: fantastic game, especially at three players. On a full day of gaming, Architects remains a very cool choice for an appetiser or a dessert with four or five players; but when I want the main course, Underwater Cities knows exactly how to hold its place on the table.

Updated session

The later note does not change my judgement: the game is again simply called “top.” The second day had a more relaxed, minimalist mood, after splashing around and eating, with even a well-known finalist from European card-game tournaments in the group. The notes then turn to sails and crates without adding a new observation about Underwater Cities; the positive verdict, however, remains completely consistent.