I was looking at this the other day (and meant to go back and look again, because fungi).
Some of the comments were referencing Cosmic Encounter for reasons I can’t recall (I assume there are asymmetric powers in play, but might be wrong).
Edit: I was wrong, and it wasn’t really a similarity to C.E. at all. This was the thread: Cute but cut-throat? Concerns and a possible friendlier variant ala Cosmic Encounter's compensation rule. | Mycelium: A Mushling Game
Lords of Vegas cancelled after they did a survey that basically said ‘too pricey’.
Wouldn’t trust these guys to deliver anymore.
Not only that but US only…
I know they’ve said people wanted 6 players for the base set in the survey, but I do wonder how many will actually play Lords of Vegas with 6 players. The number of turns in the game is set about 40 and distributed between the players. So that’s only 6-7 turns per player at 6-players. Also the advantage the 1st player gains over the 6th player is pretty huge (the 1st player - assuming they have enough cash to build a casino - gets 5 additional chances to score - that’s 1/8 of the game, as well as an additional turn).
If they really wanted to cut costs and get it cheaper, you’d set it at 4 or 5 players, surely.
Sidenote: I recently played Lords of Vegas at 2 players with my partner so she could learn the rules in advance of playing with the rest of the family. You play with the F-block out of bounds. It’s works well enough for the first 30 turns, but then you run out of casinos. Unlike at 3 or 4 players, you don’t often find yourself in evenly split casinos where spending money to reorganise makes sense. If people aren’t reorganising/remodelling a lot then all the money goes into building/sprawling. Result: By turns 30-35 you’ve both built all of your casinos and everyone is flush with cash. Sure, you could spend a bunch in the hope that your 1 dice out of 6 gets the highest value, but even if you strike it lucky your opponent will spend the same cash to reorganise again and win it back. I think to make it work you’d have to make another block out of bounds and put the ‘Game Over’ card at least 5 turns earlier.
You are paying out the casinos when F cards are drawn and then drawing again, right? And that you can continue to build casinos once you have used all your dice, you just need to pull one off the board to the new location? We play at 2 players pretty often and I don’t feel that we run into these problems.
It also helps that we play with Up, so it is both something else to spend money on, plus it gets you bigger casinos while needing less real estate.
Yes. You’re acting like I’m some kind of id…
…iot… er… hmm… it seems you had the measure of me. Seriously though, I had no idea you could move dice to new casinos and leave the empty. That makes a massive difference! Big thumbs up!
Backed Sol: Last Days of a Star, after they looked at the shipping and reduced the price for Australia by $50.
Backed this from the strength of ONE geekbuddy - he’s the only one who has commented. I scanned for bewbs and there’s a couple but they are tolerable and got the 
from me.
18xx roll and write, anyone…?
I think my view of this is very dismissive. Without playing it, it feels like an outside observer looking inside the 18xx genre and thought ‘let’s design our own 18xx with a twist’, without really understanding what the hell is 18xx. This is why City of the Big Shoulders was such a diarrhoea disaster. It was made by a newbie designer who thinks he can design an 18xx and a heavy Euro both at the same time.
As usual, happy to be proven wrong
“Diarrhoea disaster” is perhaps the best review of City of the Big Shoulders I have seen.
What intrigues me is how many people seem to think it’s good.
It definitely is some kind of hybrid. On that I agree. And that I don’t think is very good precisely…
It was nice playing it, but once was enough?
I’d probably play it out of morbid curiosity, but definitely not going to back it!
Love to try it still. I’m making a conscious effort on not being that Annoying Hipster™. It’s just that I’m tired of new designers who doesn’t seem to make an effort to be intimate with the genre that they are tackling (whatever genre that is). Which results in them just reinventing the wheel. Is this an unfair bar that I am holding up high? Maybe. Older board games are harder to access than, say, music or books. Doesn’t stop me whining about it though. Books and music are cheaper to access than board games, so I’m expecting more from a hobby that demands more money. That’s my excuse.
Board games have the disadvantage of being produced without the big industry that exists behind books and music. The majority of new games coming out are designed by people working from their garage, very often at a loss or aiming to just cover their costs. I understand you are very right on demanding more from a more expensive item, but on the other hand, I think it is good to keep that in mind.
I am with you with regards to big companies (that I think are abusing the crowdfunding system) but for other ones, specially on their first or second project, I am more willing to concede a bit more breathing space. Having said this, I definitely do not feel attracted at all to this one, though…
Board games have the advantage of being produced without the big industry that exists behind books and music. The majority of new games are polished and put on the market by people who play games themselves, not by accountants who only care about how much money they’ll bring in. 
Aren’t there a number of game designers who are current/former accountants?
Probably. And if you count by money or individual games rather than number of titles, probably the majority is owned by Asmodée which is clearly very accountant-led.
The flood of Prospero Hall games based on Disneyland attractions and old films may have an argument against your statement. 
To be fair, I have not played any of them, so maybe they are decent, I don’t know.
A former publishing executive of my acquaintance told me (10 or 15 years ago, when the industry was terrified of ebooks) that the job of publishing industry was not to publish good books, but rather not publishing crap. Crowd funding is sometimes a way to escape that filter.