Radlands | Shelfside Review

Radlands is a lane-based 2 player card game that takes 20-40 minutes per game! There's no collectables like a TCG, it's more like an LCG where you buy all the cards at once! Each player draws their hand of cards from a shared deck, and spends water (mana) every turn to play cards and activate abilities. The victory condition is to destroy all of the opponent's camps, each with their own unique effects and strategies to play around! Radlands streamlines the dueling card game experience incredibly well with simple mechanics and great depth from low complexity. However, how well does the gameplay manage randomness and balance?

Support us:

Our Website!

Purchase Games We’ve Reviewed! (Paid Link)

Shelfside Social Media:

Links to our other stuff:

Table of Contents:
Intro & Overview - (0:00)
How to Play - (1:08)
Pros - (3:32)
Cons - (12:05)
Recommender Score - (20:55)
Daniel's Personal Score - (25:48)
Ashton's Personal Score - (30:55)
Shelfside Podcast: Radlands! - (34:08)

Stuff Used:
Yu-Gi-Oh! The Ultimate Hand Trap Guide! | November 2021!
Magic the Gathering Arena - Should you play?

#boardgames #tabletop #review

[JuliuszCovers]

For me, Radlands solves the problems I have with CCGs. Most importantly: the deck construction part is fun when you spend time preparing the best deck you can (even if it’s just from a bunch of random cards you have, not a *really* good deck), but when you have built a relatively good deck, then you will most likely just annihilate a player who has a worse one, so the gameplay comes down to "who has a better deck" rather than "who makes better decisions". I know, I could technically get a set of preconstructed decks which will be fairly balanced, but then I would feel like I am missing an important part of the experience. I prefer to have a complete gaming experience in a box, which I can then explore – and Radlands does give me this. But I get it that for someone who actually does like CCGs, Radlands might not be the best choice. Maybe that’s the crux of it: Radlands is a game for people who like the idea of a CCG, but would not want to actually play one.

[kolorblindd]

I solved the camp draft by changing how we draft the cards. First we determine who's going first in the game.
Reveal 9 camps:
1st player picks 1 camp
2nd player picks 2 camps
1st player picks 2 camps
2nd player picks 1 camp.

So 1-2-2-1.

This allows both players to see the camp selection and decide their hand size based off what their opponents are picking.

My biggest issue was the game was playing it incorrectly several times because there is ONLY a single sentance several pages into the rulebook that states first player gets a single water for their first turn. Which missing that rule pretty much caused first player to win every single game....which left a sour taste in our mouth for quite some time.

Once we actually read the rules and played it correctly, we felt that the swingyness of the game to be more fun. Just nice and quick to teach, and it's great to be able to knock out a best of 3 set within an hour. I can only hope there's more expansions to add more depth...however for it's current state of the game, fully enjoy it's short and sweet without being too deep.

[Aby]

I'm personally a Star Realms nerd, but I run into the problem that I can't play it with any of my friends because the skill ceiling is too damn high - I annihilate them in a few turns, and that's no fun for anyone. I didn't get to think about strategy over the long term, and they didn't get to participate hardly at all.

Radlands has enough randomness and ability to have crazy camp synergies right out of the gate that I feel like newbies always have a chance to come up with a clever way to beat me, which is important to me. My fiancee once used Parachute Camp + Water Silo + an expensive brute to completely destroy one of my camps on her first full turn, and it kept me on the back foot for most of the game. She earned it because it was a smart play, and she didn't need practice with the system to have seen it, just intelligence. Which is what it comes down to - I value when practice with a system makes you better over time, but I also sometimes hate it, because practice takes time and familiarity, and sometimes I want to play with any normal uninitiated person. I certainly couldn't do that with Star Realms, or Netrunner, or most duelers. But I can do it with Radlands.

[arturch]

Really cool review. We are at opposite sides of the table but I understand your points. For me radlands is a 9/10. I don't have patience anymore for MTG, but I love the constant tension at the table that radlands brings. And a player has always a fighting chance, despite being hammered by the opponent all the time🤣. I felt the game very balanced and it's accessibility is a plus (for me)! The initial camp selection is what defines the strategy for the rest of the game making it crucial to win. I have a blast with this game all the time! Btw, you guys rock ! Great videos. Really enjoy your content ;)

[simonmtkwong]

What a harsh review for what is at heart a simple 30m duelling game that solves what I think is the problem with Magic for most gamers, simple setup and variability without having to deck build or buy a ton of cards, there's literally nothing else that hits that exact spot with the variability. It's possibly not really fair to compare Radlands to TCGs in general, if you prefer TCG's then you just prefer TCG's - it's like complaining that Azul doesn't have any deck building before you get to play. Its quite an over simplification to say - "I put a dude out and he gets injured", that is not a fair statement really as only noobs do that. There are so many combos and moments where you can stack a turn despite the 3/4 water limit - you don't have to spend all the cards in your hand right and you can wait to combo your better cards rather than play them straight away. Also there are so many cards that balances uneven board so the idea of no comeback or turnaround is not true either... I do wonder how you guys play, do you simply just draw a Sniper / general and literally play it straight away and then get annoyed your opponent damages it? From the way you say the game plays "itself", that certainly sounds like it to me as due to global effect cards/event/lack of cover timing is massive and often an agonising decision.

[meathir]

Wow, as someone who also plays lots of card games (I found board games to some degree from TCGs but that’s a long story), this was pretty scathing. Codex was a game I tried that was a similar “Magic in a box” type game that I thought was excellent, and I’ve also heard excellent things about BattleCON. Still, I’m glad you made this review. Redlands was on my radar as a potential option too, but as someone who’s played lots of card games Ashton’s comments really resonated with me. I really love that you guys are a two person duo all of the time; it means we as viewers always get two perspectives.

[Scary_Sary]

Best review, you hit every issue on the head. Most reviews are singing its praise without going into depth with gameplay as you did!

[Eihcra]

Great review. I agree with many points you've made. Sharing a deck means you can't really set yourself up for too much, some combos are clearly more powerful than others, but all in all I had a very fun time with it. Its swingy and quick and thinky enough to make you pause for a minute, and its a great dueling card game.

For someone who just cannot get into learning cards and building decks in these bigger CCG type games, this was super fun and definitely casual. Its a great time and I agree with it being a 7, if not an 8. Its definitely not even close to being hardcore. I've always wanted to get into Netrunner but the barrier to entry is too high right now for me. This was a great taste of that, and everyone I've played it with has liked it! And its also really fun to play a couple games over an hour or two.

Personally I also think almost all cards feel great. You need to play the high cost cards strategically and if you do manage to get them in and protect them, the subsequent turn becomes a huge play.

[bwah]

Not a fan of TCGs or deckbuilders, but Radlands was very accessible and just a fun time in general. I did get tired of it after a while though, but for what it is, I'd recommend it to anyone looking for something more casual.

[toaofpi]

I've had a lot of fun with this game, although it did take me a couple plays to really understand how to play it. Personally I give it 7 or 8. My biggest problem is definitely balance-related. I've also had plenty of games where my opponent got off to an early lead, and I just spent the rest of the game slowly trying to stay alive but not actually make any offensive progress (exactly what Ashton mentioned in his personal score).

If you get the chance, I'm curious what you'd think of another Roxley game: Dice Throne. My fiance and I love it, and it ended up being a gateway into us getting into more complicated games (despite it being quite easy to understand).

Thanks for the video!

And now I want to go play Radlands...

[deriksmith]

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but I’m pretty shocked by how harsh this review is and disagree with nearly everything said in it. Judging by the reviews oversimplification of the games tactics, I just don’t think you guys got it, or played it enough to fully appreciate its strategic depth. For example, if you’re junking cards all the time, than you’re not optimizing your resources (since it costs 2 water to draw a card), and you’ll lose to a more experienced player who’s building their hand and spending their resources more efficiently.
This is one of our favourite games (10/10) that gets to the table a lot due to its simplicity, ease of set up and just overall fun factor. Its complexity hits the sweet spot in terms of being easy to teach, while still offering a lot of strategic depth. Not to mention, one of its best selling features is that this is a card battler that was designed as a balanced stand alone game with no greedy collectible revenue generating model (looking at you MTG). The camp drafting and random draws offer enough variability to keep this game fresh with each play.
Anyways, I appreciate all the content you guys put out, but just thought this review was a little unfair and felt the need to defend the game from a different perspective.

[flamtzer]

Wow, totally agree. All your criticisms resonated so much with our experiences with the game, it so bad that for how cool the game looks, both colours and art, much of your games are filled with feel-bad moments. Resources always tight, difficult to pull combos out and ultra punished if you go for a big person play. After the disappointment from Radlands we found out and got into 'Omen: A Reign of War', also a card dueler with a shared deck and three lane system that solved many of the problems for us (its quickly becoming one of our favourites), maybe you could give it a look, anyways, great video!

[elqord.]

Sold this after a few plays. It feels like it doesn’t allow for enough flexibility and feels limiting overall. It’s often very clear what the next best action is. That felt bad.

[destrio]

I think it is a mythical idea to have a strong 2 player card battle game that isn't a collection of card sets like CCG/TCG. Compressing that style of game into a single shared deck makes for an easy setup but you lose all the depth of construction and possibly draft of a bunch of cards to evaluate as well. Fast and deep might be difficult combo to pull off, but Star Realms does a good job.

[trumptrump]

I agree with a lot of the cons you mentioned. I feel that I always want to junk all the high cost cards and only play low cost people cards. And additional con is that there are so many "restore" junk effect cards but no junk effect cards that can hit camp. That makes aggro plays less effective and the game last longer. I don't know if that is because I only played it two times. By the way, what do you think of mindbug? Most the reviews only mention the good things. I really want to see your critical comments.

[biglew]

Good review! Almost pulled trigger on this one. Probably won’t now. Not related but would love to see you guys do a review of wonderlands war I’m sure it would be epic. Love the creativity and energy you guys bring to the hobby.

[connorjohnson]

It's nice to see Daniel's scores again, sometimes it seems he's not in the channel as much.

[TymofiiLisovychenko]

Can't help but wonder if you're going to have anything to say about Mindbug, which seems to be the main opponent to Radlands. It's a lot simpler(it's basically INCREDIBLY pared down MtG - either play a card for free or attack, if attacked, block and lower strength dies or don't block and lose HP), but it's also a lot more overall zany, and it's got a clever trick up its sleeve to shift the blame from RNG to the player - the Mindbug, where twice a game you can just say "sorry, this is my creature now, play something else instead" in response to a card play.

Mostly just wondering which of the two I'd want to get, if any at all - I'm definitely the kind of person that loves the idea of playing a TCG but hates building a deck, and so far, Innovation and Neuroshima Hex came close, but Innovation is heavily OOP locally (300% of its price at secondary market!), and Neuroshima Hex isn't all that portable, especially if you want to have a choice in what you're playing and not just carry exactly two armies around.

[JackBorchers]

Excellent review, as always. Personally, the simplicity and casual nature of the game dissuaded me from backing, I'm glad I didn't. The game seems incredibly insubstantial, if I wanted a two player casual duel game I'd rather play Dice Throne

[BreezingThrou]

Was thinking about getting this a while back, but passed as I can not see it doing anything that 51st State did not do, and more. I have Magic, and even co operation Arkham type games, so there was little draw to this. But glad it is well received.