Chicago Express can fool you at first glance. The colorful cover, the nice components (wooden trains and action gauges on the board), the pretty map, it all looks like a splendid family game much in the vein of Ticket to Ride. That’s wrong. Chicago Express is one mean, nasty and ugly machine. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a fantastic board game, but Queen Games seems to have been under the impression that this is a mainstream title, approachable by anyone. This is not the case.

Somehow, and quite weirdly, they’ve been correct in their assumption, at least commercially. This board game seems to be selling quite well since it’s release, much to my surprise. It’s by far the unfriendliest and most cruel board game in my collection, and probably the unfriendliest (does that word even exist?) board game I’ve ever played.

The rules are very simple. Player with the most money at the end wins the game. You auction off shares of companies that pay dividends according to their connections on the map. That’s the only source of money in the board game, the dividends paid at the end of each turn: shares are worth nothing by themselves in the endscore calculation. Any shareholder can build tracks for any companies (no majority is necessary to do so) and anybody can auction off any share in any company (except Wabash, which only comes into the board game once a company reaches Chicago). Dividends are paid in proportion to the number of shares sold: the higher the number of shares in the hands of the players, the more smaller the amount each share will pay.

Strategy-wise, this board game is mostly an auction board game where you manipulate incentives for other players: you try to shape their options so that their best moves help you. The construction action is secondary, and the development action is only in third place because there is no fourth spot (it’s used mostly to manipulate who’s the starting player in the next round). The fact that any player can pretty much influence almost anything is a good example of how this board game is supposed to be played.

And this is where the biggest problem in Chicago Express lies: there’s a specific way the board game is supposed to be played, a way that can easily go unnoticed by the people playing, even if they are experienced gamers. More than once I’ve read on the internet comments about people that say “I just don’t get it, what’s so great about this game?”, players that have boardgaming as one of their main hobbies, even.

Make no mistake, the board game itself appears to be quite the bland experience, if you don’t see the complex network of interests involved. The simplicity here creates a depth that is definitely not visible in your first play (or even your first couple of plays). It’s not one of those complex games that intimidate newbies right at the start (I’m looking at you, Age of Steam); it’s one of those board games that appear silly or simplistic but it’s actually quite the gamer’s game. You can see first turns that guarantee unavoidable defeats or runaway leaders. Chicago express does not hold your hand, does not keep you safe, you’re the one that has to do all the work to understand it.

On the plus side, as a sort of compensation for this opacity, the game really does deserve the “express” name: a match is somewhere between 30-60 minutes, including rules explanation. An intrigued group can thus invest three hours and play the game four to five times, to see if they can understand better the details. Although one could fit a match of this between two more time-consuming games, I wouldn’t be surprised that this would end up being the “main event” of the game reunion, strategy-wise.

Queen games claims that the game scales from 2 to 6 players, however I find (and most other players agree with me) that it’s significantly better with 3 or 4, to a point that I would refuse to play it with any other number. Even so, the game’s strategies are significantly different with 3 or four players; you always have to keep a keen eye to see what’s going on, what each opponent wants and is planning at all times.

As you probably can tell from my previous paragraphs, this is hardly the newbie-friendly game. A newbie on a table of experienced players will probably throw the game to another player without knowing, so a little patience is required. Heck, a table consisted entirely of newbies will most probably end up with a random winner (even if the game has no random elements), the lucky person recipient of the bigger amount of benefits from other player’s rookie-mistakes.

Regarding the production values, I have to give the thumbs up to Queen Games: this board game is gorgeous, and the components work perfectly for the game (even if it didn’t have to be anything particularly fancy for it to work). One significant complaint is the box size, way too tall for the components. I’ve seen around the internet a player that cut his box in half (height-wise) and was still able to fit all the components in. It was claimed that this was done so that the expansions would fit in perfectly, but considering that the first expansion consists of around 25 wooden trains, I’m somewhat suspicious that it has to do with mostly shelf-space in board game stores. My shelf-space, on the other hand, seriously dislikes this decision.

Overall, the rating I give to this board game varies quite a lot between different situations. In a table with concentrated gamers who take the match seriously, I give it a 9/10, and I’m willing to play several matches in a row (not a very frequent quality for me). With non-gamers and such, I’d flat out refuse to play it (4/10 or lower). Around these parts, it has proven to be quite admired by a select few players, and disliked by the majority. It’s a cold, calculating game, and the initial (joke-like) age requirement of 29+ years (from the barebones Winsome Games first edition) is perhaps more appropriate than the Queen Games’ 12+. I’d definitely think twice about playing this with teenagers (and I’m sure they’d much rather play something that looks more exciting). If you enjoy board games of financial and incentive manipulation, and you regularly play with the same opponents (and they’re willing to play a game many times for it to really shine), you can’t do much better than Chicago Express. The casual gamer should probably stick to Ticket to Ride, or even Steam (where the challenges are much more apparent).

Click here to order Chicago Express from Amazon