A Few Acres of Snow

These reviews were left by users who have played the game. If you'd like to leave a review, you can start by going to the game page.

Rating Summary (40 Total)


I had some interesting fun with this one for a few plays, but it feels the same every time I play this one. It feels kind of scripted. And the british do have a distinct advantage if they exploit it, and the french are better if they don't.


I haven't been this excited about a game since I first played Twilight Struggle. Love, love, love the many agonizing choices, the depth of play, and the artwork and graphic style.Could very well be a 10 for me, depending on what Martin Wallace makes of the dominant HH strategy.


Signed by Martin Wallace :oD


This was my first game to get me into the hobby. While it's a pretty fun game, it's only for two players and there isn't a whole lot of variety.


Like almost all Wallace games, it's a little rough around the edges--more options than choices, and some things are just never worth taking. That said, it's definitely one of his cleanest designs. More importantly, this is really the first time someone's done something truly innovative with the core Dominion idea. I really like Thunderstone, but let's face it--it's basically Dominion. This is not. Who knew that the deck-builders could run a really tight wargame? And I love the theme; the Seven Years War is a favourite subject of mine, and Wilderness War left me cold. [EDIT] Ugh, Halifax Hammer! Whether it is broken per se or merely apt to make the game repetitive, it is a serious problem. Did Mr. Wallace play any deck-building games at all? Did he not understand anything about deck-trimming?


A really fantastic blend of deck-building and board placement. The available actions seem overwhelming when first learning the game, but you quickly realize how much your hand limits what you can do. That makes the decision tree much more manageable. I know about the controversy regarding the "unbeatable" strategy, but we haven't had any problems with it. If we do, we can just switch to the revised rules.


I played this when it was new. Let it go after the hammer fell, and then reacquired it years later. I've played it twice since reacquiring it. There is so much to like about this game. The theme, the logical connection between recruiting a new card and waiting for it to arrive in the new world, the exquisite artwork. Of course the critics are correct there is a potential problem. The hammer strategy might be a long term problem for us. But for now the game is providing good fun. My opponent does not know the hammer strategy, and I am not going to try it. So at least while we are in this 'bubble' we are having a rollicking good time with this game.


I thought that I would finally find a Martin Wallace game to enjoy. I was wrong. The game requires several plays to understand 'good' gameplay and those learning games are simply slow an painful. Not for me.


Played a couple of times, but not scratched the surface yet. The whole card drafting mechanic wrapped around a war game is an interesting idea. Initial rating of 7.


Initial rating. Enjoyed learning rules and playing half a game. I get why it's so beloved. Very fun to run a lean deck and create powerful combinations


I can't relate to the mentality of someone who doesn't play a game to win. I like to study games, learn their nuances, unlock the secrets of their underlying systems. The fact that you don't want to learn about the Halifax Hammer doesn't mean it ceases to exist. It just means you don't care about learning how to play the game well. The people who deny the Hammer's existence are the climate change deniers of the boardgaming world. The late Tim Seitz ended this conversation in 2012. Yes, it's real. Fortunately, Hands in the Sea has fixed the inherent problem here, and has delivered on what AFAoS promised. So, play that instead.