Tag: 2-player

Clark Kent Robs a Train? A Review of The Glasgow Train Robbery

The Glasgow Train Robbery is a 2-Player only cooperative game that was on Gamefound back in April 2026. I backed it, and it delivered to me in late June 2026. That’s right, only 3 months from crowdfunding to delivery!

This is the story of the Great Train Robbery of 1963 (see wikipedia entry here)! Yes, this game is modeling a real event! Two players work together to try to pull off that same train heist! This is an asymmetric cooperative game with limited communication for only two people!

Let’s see how well in works!

Unboxing and Gameplay

See Coke can above for scale.

This is a dual-language product: Spanish and English. See above for the two rulebooks that come in the game!

Some cards are language independent (see middle set above) and other cards are definitely tied to a language (the same card in English on the right and Spanish on the left).

I had to spend a little bit of time separating the two out. In the end, I put all the Spanish cards together with one rubber band and just put it back in the box.

The two players are playing very asymmetric roles in this game. One player plays the Glasgow side, playing the Coordinator. See above. I wish the game had included ome way to mark which side was which, so I made my own little cards!! The Coordinator is all about supplies and handling the first four stages of the Plan for the train robbery! The first four Plans are all about the set-up and execution of the robbery!

A Plan (level 1 above) is executed by spending the resources (on the left side of the card) when the train is at the location (upper right on card) with appropriate characters (upper left of card) next to it! So, you need resources, minions in the right place, and the train in the right place! Whew! Now, you can resolve a Plan card, even if you don’t have all the resources, but the penalty is listed on the bottom of the card for EACH resource you can’t pay! In this case, you add more fingerprints to the bag.

This is also a bag-building game to some extent; the bag is filled (very carefully and specifically) with resources that you may need to complete challenges. The big is filled and emptied (usually only) when players REST for an action.

The resources (see above) are all tokens you can collect by either drawing from the bag (at certain points in the game, usually a REST), visiting a hideout, or having a special card! These resources are “criminal” resources: gloves, guns, rope, etc (see above) needed for the heist! These resources are surprisingly sparse; it’s harder to get resources than you think.

The resources are usually managed by the Coordinator: the Coordinator’s side has a house with all the resources. When it’s time to put resources in the bag (during a REST action), one resource is put in for each person in the room with that resource! The Coordinator moves people around the house (and outside the house to help), so this is a delicious tension! When should the Coordinator use his precious turns to move people in the house (so we can have more rope in the bag at a REST) or when should he move people OUTSIDE the house because the other guy needs more help?

The Operator is the other side (in London). Once the people have left the house, the Coordinator no longer controls them; only the Operator may move them! The Operator’s job is to have people in the right place at the right time! The Operator is also given the unenviable position of dealing with unexpected “issues” that crop up! The game calls these issues Contingencies.

Contigencies are kinda similar to the Plan cards; they are resolved by discarding resources, but you have to have enough characters next to the landmark to resolve the contingency! See above. If you don’t take care of contingencies, they cause time to expire sooner, fingerprints to explode, and make the game end faster.

This is a limited communication game; you can occasionally discard a card to say “3 keywords” and tell the other player what you need. RED-BLUE-TOWER probably means “get a red guy and a blue guy next to the water tower so I can complete phase 1 of the Plan!”

This is very much an asymmetric game; each player has special decks (Coordinator or Operator decks), different ways to operate, and different actions! If you can get solve stages 1-5 of the Plans without leaving too many fingerprints before the Train gets to London, you win! Whew!

This is a really interesting looking game with its own “style” of art! I think it looks pretty neat.

Clark Kent is Robbing a Train?

When my friend Teresa first saw the game box, she said “Is Clark Kent robbing a train?” I had to tell her, no, he’s not, but I can see why she said that.

I think the game art is meant to mimic some known pictures of the original heist members, and if you look at the pictures from Wikipedia on The Great Train Robbery … that one guy on the right looks suspiciously like Clark Kent.

Solo Play

Let’s be 100% clear; this is ONLY a 2-Player game! There is no solo mode at all. None. No Saunders’ Law here!

And yet, solo was the first way I played!!! And I recommend you play solo the first time as well! What do I mean by this? This is applying the Changing Perspectives idea (see link here) where you “pretend” you don’t know what the other player knows, and try to play the game without using the other character’s knowledge. In this case, you alternate between the Operator and the Coordinator characters, but “pretend” you don’t know what Plans/Contingencies they have!

It is a little wonky to play the game solo like this, and it’s also hard! You can only use the information on the board and the keywords communicated to inform your decisions! It’s also very instructive to think: “Ok, if I didn’t know what the Operator’s Plan’s were, and only the keywords they’ve told me, what would I do?” This is a really interesting thought experiment. It’s also a better way to play solo than I thought it would be. It does work, but you just have to have the mental discipline to not “cheat”!

Even if you hate this idea of the Changing Perspectives, it’s a great way to learn the game: you get to play both sides, you get to see what operations are available, you see when it makes sense to communicate, and you see how the game flows. I also recommend physically switching sides when you play one position or the other: you almost have to because of the way the game sets-up! I strongly encourage this physical switching; it really throws you into the appropriate character when you are in their physical shoes!! (I don’t recommend changing shoes every time you switch sides; that’s too much).

Play the game solo once using Changing Perspectives idea, then you can decide if you ever want to play it again solo. I think I do? But, more importantly, I can now teach my friend how to play!

Cooperative Play – Two Players

Of course, the real way this is meant to be played is 2-Players! On opposite sides of each other! We can see the guys and gals we have in play and their specials, but we can’t see each other’s Plans or Contingencies.

I’ve played a few 2-Players games now (with first Teresa then Sam), and it’s clear that first game is absolutely a teaching game. The Glasgow Train Robbery has a lot of systems and rules, and seeing how all these systems interplay is complex! My first games with both Sam and Teresa were both losses. Because they are learning the game!

After we lost, we talked about “WHY” we lost! “Oh, I need to move the people out quicker so they can have more stuff” “Oh, I need to be communicating sooner”, etc. Let’s be clear; it does feel like we have enough agency to affect the endgame; we just need to know what to do with that agency!

This is an odd game with lots of systems, but it works as a 2-Player game. The Limited Communication takes a little getting used it (you can really only communicate using keywords when you take that action), but it does work. It even seems thematic to a certain degree, because it was a lot harder to communicate back in 1963! No cell phones! Fewer phones!

Those first few games take about 2.5 hours. The box says 60 minutes. This estimate seems really wrong, unless you have mastered the game.

What I Liked

Style: The art style and graphics design is “quirky”, but it works. It is very readable as well.

Quirky: Everything about this game is quirky; the art, the gameplay, the actions, the limited communication, the gameplay, the asymmetric sides, it’s all so … quirky. But it works.

Monopoly: In the original real-life heist, they literally caught some of the people by finding their fingerprints on the board! And this game models that mechanism! The more people people in a room with the Monopoly token when you REST (see above), the more fingerprints get thrown in the bag! If you ever run out off fingerprint tokens, you lose! The police caught you!

That’s right, this game penalizes you for playing Monopoly, like it should.

What I Don’t Like

Keywords: When you communicate to the other side, you can “only communicate in keywords” (see rules above). But, it literally never defines what a keyword is! The only two uses of the word “keyword” are on page 17 of the rulebook (above). They give an example of a communication, which gives you a sense of what a keyword might be! But it’s very frustrating they don’t define this! Can you use numbers? Character’s names? Can you use purple to imply red + blue? It seems like you might be able to be smart and come up with a code and get more info out! For a game where limited communication is such an important part of the game, this really needed to be more clearly defined. What you can/can’t communicate is poorly defined, and it will affect your gameplay in some way!

Action Cards and Randomness: There are some great Action cards, and there are some not-so-great Action cards. Some of these Action Cards can mean the difference between winning and losing IF THEY COME OUT EARLY in the game! So, for example, you may get lucky and can activate a character powers early on … and that makes the game viable! But it comes out too late, it sorta screws you. It can be a little frustrating to have such a swinginess to a game with so many systems. It’s frustrating when a complex game like The Glasgow Train Robbery can go south because of too much randomness.

Things I Am Not Sure About

Modules: There are 5 modules you can add to the game to change it up. That’s cool. You can extend the life of the game. I just don’t know if I will ever play any of those modules? This game is hard to get to the table as it is, with its 2-Player only, limited communication, asymmetric play! I don’t know if I can about these modules?

Conclusion

It’s hard to recommend this cooperative game; it’s quirky, complicated, asymmetric, limited communication, 2-player only, and it’s hard to teach. And yet, I do recommend it! Its quirky nature makes it something different and interesting. I would suggest playing this (at least a few times) to get a sense of it before you decide if you like it or not. You have to kind of absorb it because there’s a lot going on; I think the juice is worth the squeeze.

This is 6.5/10 for solo (I know, it doesn’t really have a solo mode, but you can play it solo using the Changing Perspectives idea), and 7.0/10 for cooperative. It’s right on the cusp of a full recommendation, but I do like it and I do recommend it. It’s just so quirky.

I am guessing this game would be great for a couple who could really dive in, try multiple plays, and enjoy the modules.

Ace of Spades Solo and Cooperative Review. Would You Call This A Cozy Game?

What kind of crazy person would call this a cozy game? This is set in a hard and unforgiving old west town, with gunfighters battling bad guys! The art is great but kind of harsh, the theme is hard, and the game … just doesn’t look cozy. But I argue that it kinda is! Check out why below …

Ace of Spaces is a solo or 2-Player cooperative game: players battle bad guys using Poker Hands to do damage; bigger and more powerful bad guys emerge as play continues!

Although Ace of Spades was originally released in 2025, the original publication was recalled because of some offensive cards. So, the publisher Devir re-released this game fairly recently in 2026, so we are calling this a 2026 release? I guess?

Let’s take a look!

Unboxing and Gameplay

Ace of Spades is a smaller box (see Coke can above for scale) mostly because it’s just cards (and one giant notater for hit points).

Players use poker hands to do damage to bad guys, so the game includes a “standard” deck of cards (see the fake “worn” veneer above) with a special “Foil” ace of spades card.

There are enemies you fight along the way to the big boss. The starting enemies are simple (like the 5 hit point Mule above) …

… and the final enemy is Lord Overkill (above with 50 hit points!) And that’s the easy boss!!

How do you do damage to enemies? You play poker hands, and each poker hand has a “damage” it does! See above as the Flush does 5 points of damage, the Full House does 6 and so on. You’ll also notice that face cards (JQK) do extra +1 damage, and Aces do +3!!

Each enemy you face has an “environment” (like the one above) which describes how many poker hands you can play, and how many redraws you get. The bullets (4) are the number of poker hands you can play, and the deck arrow (4) is the number of redraws you get.

There are 11 bad guys overall on the way to Lord Overkill!! See above! If you can take all 12, you win! You lose if you can’t take out an enemy with the given number of poker hands.

If you look at the bottom of the cards of the enemies, you’ll see that killing them gets you a “one-time” or “ongoing” power you can use in later combats. For example, if you take out the Sheriff above, you get the ongoing power that Kings to do extra extra damage!

If you can make it all the way to the end and kill Lord Overkill, you win!

It’s really just playing poker hands to do damage to bad guys.

Controversy

So, I didn’t know too much about the Ace of Spades controversy until I got my copy! I got a 1st edition used from a Board Game auction from my LFGS … and it turns out the 1st edition has the controversial cards! One of them is above (the slaver) and the others … I don’t to want to show. One of them is a slave card.

If you want to know more about the controversy, see this board game geek thread. You probably want to get the 2nd edition WITHOUT the slaver, slave, and other cards. It’s the 2nd edition that came out in 2026 and that’s probably the one you want.

When I played with my friend Teresa, we just kinda put the controversial cards off to the side and didn’t play with them.

Solo Play

So, this is either a solo game or a 2-Player cooperative game. See above. Thanks for following Saunders’ Law and having a solo mode!

The solo game unfolds as you expect: you get poker hands and try to damage to your current bad guy! In the solo game, you get a full hand of 8 cards and play 5 at a time (fewer if you are playing easy mode) to play a poker hand to do damage. There are also ways to scale to make it easier and harder.

As a solo game, it was fine. The problem is that you are very dependent on the cards you get! Sure, that’s how poker is, but I found this really hard to win: it was very random. Sure, you can play smart and use the one-shot and ongoing abilities, and sure you can play the odds and get better hands. But I have yet to win a game.

And here’s the weird thing: since I know it’s kind of random and I’ll just have to do the best I can, it’s not stressful. I know that my game is completely defined by the cards I draw, and if I do great, HUZZAH! If I do poorly, oh well. I can try to play smart and I can try to think my way out, but since I know it can be very random … I don’t care? Not in a bad way but in a “Eh, that’s the way it goes”. I am going to make a controversial statement: this is a cozy game. You do the best you can, but meh, whatever.

I have played quite a number of games and haven’t won. I don’t care that I haven’t won … in a good way? It’s kinda fun.

Cooperative Play

As a 2-Player game, the game basically plays the same, but you alternate between the two players. There are still 8 cards out, but 3 are shared between the players, while each player has his own hand of 5. Here’s the thing: you have limited communication between the 2 Players. You cannot communicate what you have, except vague stuff.

I generally don’t like limited communication games; the rules are generally pretty vague except for “you can’t shared exactly what you have”. So, we probably stepped over the line a little. I think I would have preferred some limited communication rules more like The Crew (where you get a single communication per round) or something like that.

There were also no rules for sharing. To be fair, the 3 cards in the middle are shared between the two players, but it would have been nice to have other limited sharing rules.

I actually think (but I am not sure) the game would have been more fun with either some sharing or more explicit communication rules. Having said that, my favorite way to play this is 2-Player. Why? As I said before: it’s a cozy game! I am pretty sure I stuck getting what cards I get, so if I lose, whatever.

Again, calling this cozy is not necessarily a bad thing. I can sit with my friend for hours just playing and hoping we can get a good run to win! But we know the odds are against us. If we win, great! In not, oh well. That’s my definition of a cozy game: I can keep playing and not be stressed. My friend and I can hang out. Since I know the luck of the cards governs the winning, I don’t be stressed because I know I can’t do too muich about it (mostly) and I just play and have fun.

Conclusion

Play poker solo (or cooperatively with your friend ) and beat-up bad guys! It’s a simple premise, and it’s probably easy to get anyone to play it because most people know how to play poker! (Just make sure you get the 2nd Edition so you don’t offend anyone). I really like the idea that I can pull this game out for non-gamers and show them how a cooperative game works using poker hands! That’s a really neat way to introduce people to cooperative games! Most people know how poker hands work!

I also love the art in this game; it’s very comic-booky (Jonah Hex?) and very striking.

I am calling this a cozy game because I know the game is too random to take it too seriously: I will be always be at the whim of my draws, so I can lean back, play the best I can, and say “oh well” when I lose … because I will lose quite a bit. I know! With art and theme like this, how can you call this a cozy game? A cozy game for me is just sitting back and playing and saying “ok” as we play.

In the end, I prefer Ace of Spades 2-Player. It’s a cozy game where I can hang our with my friend and play a friendly (a truly friendly) game of poker. We can play all night and probably lose, but we’re still playing together and hanging out and having fun.

6.5/10 for solo play (too random to want to play all the time), but 7.5/10 or 8/10 for the 2-player game.

Appendix: Coziness vs Agency

I wonder … if we added house rules for sharing and/or communicating if I would like the game more or less? I KNOW the game is too random so I don’t care too much, that’s why it’s cozy for me … I can’t do much about how the cards come out for me and my friend, so I just say “whatever”; that makes it cozy for me. But if I added some sharing rules (“we can give one card per turn”) or communication rules (“we share show one card per turn”), maybe I would start caring more? Then maybe I would be more stressed and it wouldn’t be a cozy game anymore? Or maybe I’d like it more because I had more agency? I don’t know!