|
Mr. Glass posted:I think The Great Dalmuti probably fits the bill. Isn't that just rear end in a top hat with prettier cards?
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 14:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
Pander posted:Isn't that just rear end in a top hat with prettier cards? The rules are similar, but the distribution of cards is vastly different.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 14:52
|
|
|
Mr. Glass posted:I think The Great Dalmuti probably fits the bill. Sounds like a great suggestion, thanks! Hadnt heard of it before.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 15:37
|
|
|
Rudy Riot posted:Are there any trick taking games like Gang of Four/Tichu for a large number of people? Frank's Zoo plays up to 8 and is a better climbing game than Dalmuti, I think. It uses animalsthat can defeat eachother instead of numbers and includes a full cycle (mouse defeats elephant... back to the start) We never play the advanced rules, just the basic wilds+mosquito=>elephant rules (you'll know what I mean when you buy it)
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 15:55
|
|
|
PlaneGuy posted:Frank's Zoo plays up to 8 and is a better climbing game than Dalmuti, I think. It uses animalsthat can defeat eachother instead of numbers and includes a full cycle (mouse defeats elephant... back to the start) We never play the advanced rules, just the basic wilds+mosquito=>elephant rules (you'll know what I mean when you buy it) Frank's Zoo is pretty good, but they should have gone full on and made something that is small that beats Killer Whales otherwise you actually have a worse distribution than Dalmuti because instead of 1 Trump card there's 4 that if you get lucky with 2 can beat 1. I have both, I like Frank's Zoo more with younger kids, older kids seem to prefer Dalmuti and adults just play rear end in a top hat and drink while doing so. Our variant on rear end in a top hat is that a pair or triple 3s can beat a deuce which gives threes a bit of leverage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 16:25
|
|
|
moths posted:They keep coming out with micro expansions, but this game really just needs a coherent rulebook and a bigger box. I suspect both.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 16:58
|
|
|
Does anyone here have a copy of the high-res renders of the Space: The Convergence cards still hanging around on their hard drive they could toss my way? I've been considering finally getting a copy printed, and if I'm gonna drop the money anyway, I want a copy I can at least be proud of.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 18:07
|
|
|
nimby posted:Common things newbies I teach sometimes have trouble with: I'd like to throw in the idea of "controlling a system". This means that you own all the planets in a system AND have ships in space. If you own the planet and there are not ships in space (your, or otherwise) you don't control the system. This is huge for objectives that require you to "control X amount of systems outside your home system". For systems that don't have planets, a single ship will suffice. nimby posted:Be stingy with your command counters, you only get 2 free ones each turn! The Transfer action is great for this. With it you activate 2 systems, but only spend 1 command counter from your command pool. Then you move units between them and build in one of them. So you can move previously built units out of your home system, then build a new fleet. Furthering my comment about "control". A transfer action can only take place between systems that are unactivated, and have units in them. A system with an empty planet you own is not a valid target for a transfer action. The only other advice I can think that's really important is to not discount the amouth of influence (red number) a planet gives. If nothing else, when the strategy card "Leadership" is activated, the secondary allows you to purchase additional command counters for 2 influence each (up to three). You can then place these counters anywhere you like, on your race sheet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 18:49
|
|
|
Trynant posted:Dominant Species seems to fit the time range you're talking about (I'd say expect a 3-4 hour game on average), has epic'ness, lack of luck, wargameyness while not being fiddly counters or complicated rules. Thing is, it shines best with six player factions, but the game does scale and even if that's not enough has a 3-player variant where each player controls 2 player factions. This is my personal recommendation. I prefer DS with fewer players, but maybe I'm the odd man out here. 3-4 seems about ideal. If I have that much time to kill and 6 players, there's nothing that could convince me to not attempt to pull out Dune. Nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 19:54
|
|
|
Clockwork Gadget posted:Does anyone here have a copy of the high-res renders of the Space: The Convergence cards still hanging around on their hard drive they could toss my way? I've been considering finally getting a copy printed, and if I'm gonna drop the money anyway, I want a copy I can at least be proud of. This. I've never done the cube thing, and i love the theme of STG but the fact that all that's available is an intentionally crappy low-res render, when there're perfectly good high resolution files out there is a show stopper for me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 20:51
|
|
|
Any thoughts on Descent 2nd ed? I was thinking of picking it up, since I enjoyed playing the doom board game back in the day. I avoided Descent 1st ed. since it came in a giant, intimidating box, but it seems like ffg has pared it down to a shorter and easier game (a plus for me and my friends).
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 20:58
|
|
|
ConorT posted:Any thoughts on Descent 2nd ed? I was thinking of picking it up, since I enjoyed playing the doom board game back in the day. I avoided Descent 1st ed. since it came in a giant, intimidating box, but it seems like ffg has pared it down to a tighter, shorter experience. It plays much faster, and was honestly more enjoyable to me than 1st edition. It has a baked-in campaign, and it loses a lot of the finnicky bits that slowed first edition down. Enemy spawns make more sense now, too. The biggest problem so far is that goblins are horrible little shits to deal with if the scenario calls for you to race the monsters for resources on the board.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 21:02
|
|
|
Byers2142 posted:It plays much faster, and was honestly more enjoyable to me than 1st edition. It has a baked-in campaign, and it loses a lot of the finnicky bits that slowed first edition down. Enemy spawns make more sense now, too. The biggest problem so far is that goblins are horrible little shits to deal with if the scenario calls for you to race the monsters for resources on the board. Horrible because they're too fast? I'm not really expecting the scenarios to be perfectly balanced since prior experience makes me doubt its possible to do this in an asymmetric game of this nature. Odds are if I buy this game I'm going to end up being the invader anyway, and I'll probably go easy on the other players if they're getting their asses whupped to ensure a close game where everyone has A Good Time. ConorT fucked around with this message at 21:52 on Jul 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 21:12
|
|
|
Played a couple games of Infiltration. It's from Fantasy Flight and it's a bit, for lack of a better description, "Fantasy Flight". It's also light, quick, and clear (not always common for FF). There's some reasonably interesting choices, and it's quite interactive without feeling political (again, breaking from FF mold a bit). There's a fair number of bits and bobs for a small game, but setup and tear-down are very quick - and play doesn't feel fiddly (though it might start to if your board randomly had all the NPCs or something). There's unpredictability in the form of hidden information, simultaneous action selection (mitigated by some cards), and random room placement and item draws. Components are fine, and fit with the Android theme. Overall: this would be a direly bad game if it took 2 hours to play. The core push-your-luck mechanic is effectively a once-per-game choice (as is the item draft, which is the other big set of interesting decisions), and the whole affair wouldn't scale well. But, as it stands, you can play a full game in 20 minutes and it works pretty well. No real complaints - good design, good light game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 21:48
|
|
|
ConorT posted:Horrible because they're too fast? I'm not really expecting the scenarios to be perfectly balanced since prior experience makes me doubt its possible to do this in an asymmetric game of this nature. Odds are if I buy this game I'm going to end up being the invader anyway, and I'll probably go easy on the other players if they're getting they're asses whupped to ensure a close game where everyone has A Good Time. Yeah, fast and unblockable. they can move through you, so you can't block them off to stop them. They die easily enough, but when they double move their like fantasy cockroaches.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 21:51
|
|
|
Just got my copy of Citadels. I've played twice with the default 8 roles; which swaps are the most interesting?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 22:00
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Just got my copy of Citadels. I've played twice with the default 8 roles; which swaps are the most interesting? Definitely switch out the Queen for the Artist because the Queen is worthless in games with more than 4 people, it's just too hard to use, particularly for it's number. Changing out the Emperor and the King is good because the Emperor requires interaction with other players so it's a little more interesting. Also I recall the Witch is good because the player still gets money or cards so it isn't as crippling as just being taken out of the game for a turn. Otherwise the rest are all just fun. I think mixing and matching is the best.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 22:06
|
|
|
sighnoceros posted:Games with simultaneous turn elements like secret action selection or other backstab-enabling features are nice, and ideally something not too luck-heavy. ... Something closer to simpler rules with deep strategy instead of a billion fiddly bits would be preferred. I know this is from the last page but The End of the Triumvirate A light Euro 'war' game with different paths to victory, designed for three players ( I wouldn't play it with any other number really). The only downcheck is that it's not going to run for hours and hours and hours but that just means you can play again! Edit: \/\/ I'd love to see if you find something like that, worker placement and simultaneous turns seem to be working at cross purposes orphean fucked around with this message at 05:10 on Jul 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 04:57
|
|
|
Simultaneous turns is a pretty cool design concept... not a big wargamer, are there any kingdom building / worker placement games that make use of it? I guess one potential problem is that the rules for resolving conflicts have to be really tight, or else every turn can become a huge tangle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 05:06
|
|
|
sector_corrector posted:Simultaneous turns is a pretty cool design concept... not a big wargamer, are there any kingdom building / worker placement games that make use of it? DUNGEON LORDS
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 05:13
|
|
|
Finally got in my first play of Space Alert. Had 4 people, none had played before. We breezed through the first 2 training missions and a simulated mission. Decided we had time for one more, and we felt confident moving to an advanced simulator. We were doing well despite not noticing until resolution that our hacked shields were actually on the other side of the ship from where we were repairing. Luckily there were literally no other threats on that side of the ship. Anyway we did fine after that, easily taking out another internal threat with our battlebots, and then one guy forgot to wiggle the mouse ("ok, turn 8 you're wiggling the mouse, yeah? Yeah.") and that delayed us all, causing us to take damage, which caused our laser to do 1 less damage, and our missiles to be delayed, leading to us being destroyed on the last turn. Despite dying there, the game didn't seem as hard or crazy as people make it out to be, as we only barely died on 1/4 missions. Of course, we didn't even make it to a real mission yet and we didn't play with any of the yellow threat cards, so I'm sure that made it much simpler. Pretty drat fun though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 05:15
|
|
|
I hope there's a Space Alert expansion that adds in a space station. Space Station 13 in board game form would be pretty amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 05:23
|
|
|
Elysium posted:Finally got in my first play of Space Alert. Had 4 people, none had played before. We breezed through the first 2 training missions and a simulated mission. Decided we had time for one more, and we felt confident moving to an advanced simulator. We were doing well despite not noticing until resolution that our hacked shields were actually on the other side of the ship from where we were repairing. Luckily there were literally no other threats on that side of the ship. Anyway we did fine after that, easily taking out another internal threat with our battlebots, and then one guy forgot to wiggle the mouse ("ok, turn 8 you're wiggling the mouse, yeah? Yeah.") and that delayed us all, causing us to take damage, which caused our laser to do 1 less damage, and our missiles to be delayed, leading to us being destroyed on the last turn. My friends and I thought we were hotshots at Space Alert for the first month or two of play until I realized I had 2 copies of the training CD. I downloaded the mp3s of the real missions and god drat did our spirits get plunged.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 05:34
|
|
|
Trip Report - Travel Blog After a nice steak dinner, I suggested to B that we all go back to his place and try out the new game I gave him. In a group of newbie/casual gamers and non-gamers, it went over like a 747 full of frequent-fliers. We played two games, one on each map. I got top $$ for Europe, T won USA, mostly by muscling everyone out of her way to get tokens down first (what me whine? lol). B threw the second game (USA) after forgetting in round 1 that we wanted short trips again, not long ones. He spent the rest of the game aiming for low-score, and managed to get rid of most of his cash every round. Since the manual specifies that everyone who enjoys their trip is a winner, we decided this was a perfectly valid strategy and so he won. H made the classic mistake of going for two seemingly close destinations that happened to be in opposite directions, resulting in a couple trips that had one really long leg, but she still proclaimed the game wonderful and looked forward to trying it again, maybe with her kids next time. I won't go into another detailed description of the game and how it works, but I want to share my impressions. This is a fantastic "get together" game, that would fill the same niche as Scattergories, Balderdash, Cranium. It's mentally engaging and great for people who like puzzles. I wouldn't say it's a party game, but in a small to medium-sized group it's way more fun than Trivial Pursuit, while scratching a similar "Put actual knowledge to interesting use" itch. I would unhesitatingly recommend it to almost anyone. There's not much strategy to this game, you can't really plan ahead, and while you do have to make choices, there are no consequences to any of them beyond your immediate score. It's certainly not going to fill the shoes of a heavy euro or anything, but it doesn't even attempt to. As filler though, it's absolutely tops. Setup takes about 1-2 minutes, explaining the rules about 5, and each round takes ~5m to play and score. Since the play develops over seven successive rounds, each of which is completely separate from the others but making use of the same sparse handful of components, it lends itself well to being cut short while still leaving you with a reasonable score to choose a winner by. Perfect for breaking out while waiting for the pizza, or that last player to arrive. To sum up: Travel Blog = Super fun! St0rmD fucked around with this message at 06:29 on Jul 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 05:45
|
|
|
Elysium posted:Finally got in my first play of Space Alert. Had 4 people, none had played before. We breezed through the first 2 training missions and a simulated mission. Decided we had time for one more, and we felt confident moving to an advanced simulator. We were doing well despite not noticing until resolution that our hacked shields were actually on the other side of the ship from where we were repairing. Luckily there were literally no other threats on that side of the ship. Anyway we did fine after that, easily taking out another internal threat with our battlebots, and then one guy forgot to wiggle the mouse ("ok, turn 8 you're wiggling the mouse, yeah? Yeah.") and that delayed us all, causing us to take damage, which caused our laser to do 1 less damage, and our missiles to be delayed, leading to us being destroyed on the last turn. This is like saying "I did awesome on the big wheel and I only fell down once with the training wheels on, BMX Racing must be easy!" There is a noticeable jump in difficulty between the "simulated" missions and the real mission tracks. There are more jumps in difficulty when you begin shuffling advanced threats into the deck. But hell if you still think it's too slow-paced and simple, you can always get the expansion and try out the double-action deck and accompanying missions... Glad you had fun, it's awesome that people are still getting into this game. I plan to introduce it to another friend of mine very soon now. Broken Loose posted:DUNGEON LORDS This. There's a turn order, but you place all your actions secretly and simultaneously, and then the results of your actions can be slightly different based on how many people did the same thing before or after you in the specified turn order. It's a very elegant game mechanically, but it is completely infuriating to play because the difficulty is tuned so that you never feel like you're building an awesome dungeon so much as trying to hold a disaster together. St0rmD fucked around with this message at 06:19 on Jul 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 06:05
|
|
|
orphean posted:I hope there's a Space Alert expansion that adds in a space station. Space Station 13 in board game form would be pretty amazing. My God, it could be co-op versus an event deck, with a tiled station layout, classes, and modes (traitor, meteor, alien). It'd be beautiful.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 11:51
|
|
|
St0rmD posted:This. There's a turn order, but you place all your actions secretly and simultaneously
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 11:55
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:The gently caress? Have you even played Dungeon lords? Where are the secret actions? The whole turn revolves around the concept that you can see what actions the previous players took and how it changes the roles. If we're talking about the same game, I think you've been playing Dungeon Lords wrong. Each player secretly selects three (of their available six) actions, plays them facedown in front of them, and then reveals actions simultaneously and places their minions in turn order. You don't get to see previous actions when selecting your current actions, unless you're talking about the two actions you know everyone can't play?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 12:04
|
|
|
Played Space Alert for the first time this past weekend. Four of us managed to explode the ship on both initial simulators, and then on the first 'advanced' simulator actually got it together and remembered to fuel the main reactor. We barely survived! Which counts as a win. I could have played all night, but one of our number is passionately in love with Last Night On Earth so we switched. We've never come close to a zombie victory in that game. Do any of the expansions change that?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 12:18
|
|
|
Dungeon Petz, much like Dungeon Lords, has a system that is half-simultaneous, half-order based. Everyone has a certain number of gold and imps, which they can divide secretly into up to 6 different groups of any size. Once everyone has assigned groups, you reveal them and the largest groups get to use an action (which can be any on the board) first, with ties broken by player order. You work down the different sized groups until there are none left! I like it because even if you are last in turn order and you really need a specific action, you can just create one big group so that you don't get completely shut out, although this will mean that you have less actions than other people or that your other, smaller groups won't have any good slots left, although that's all part of the strategy of the game. Dungeon Petz also is slightly more forgiving than Dungeon Lords, although it is entirely possible to end up with a shop filled with unhappy, starving pets, all your imps injured trying to prevent said pets from escaping and all your cages smeared with animal poo poo. I would rate both as solid worker placement games with the actual worker placement being different from the norm.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 12:23
|
|
|
Whoops, totally forgot about the order cards (I was talking about the minion system), it seems I'm talking out of my rear end and it's time to refresh my DL again. Sorry 
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 13:12
|
|
|
sector_corrector posted:Simultaneous turns is a pretty cool design concept... not a big wargamer, are there any kingdom building / worker placement games that make use of it? As has been said, Dungeon Lords, absolutely. Wars of the Roses: Lancaster vs. York is amazing, too. The simultaneous action selection is also a much bigger part of the game than Dungeon Lords. And it's got card drafting, which is another awesome mechanic. Basically, in WotR, each round starts with everyone drafting cards, which include towns and cities, nobles, bishops, mercenaries, etc. At the end of the turn, you're trying to have majority control in as many of the various regions of England as you can. But the middle of the turn is where the bulk of the game is. You've got a personal board behind a screen, and the cards you've drafted and/or captured from other players give you your income for the turn. Behind the screen, you then move your nobles and ship captains between adjacent regions, and allot your money to various things, including raising troops to attack or defend locations, bid for the Captain of Calais, or bribe/counter-bribe nobles and bishops. Attack and defense is a straightforward numerical comparison. If you've got a castle that automatically raises 2 troops, I have to attack with 3 to win it. But maybe you're going to anticipate this and raise one or two troops there yourself to defend, in which case I should send more to be safe... also, if someone else attacks afterwards (with players behind in points going later in turn order), they're only going to have to beat whatever troops the winner of our battle has left. Meanwhile, nobles and bishops can be bribed for an amount equal to twice the income they provide each turn... whereas they can be counter-bribed by their owner by simply returning their income to them. (For instance, if a bishop brings me $6 per turn, you could put $12 on his space on your board to try to win him over, but if I just put $6 on him, that would cancel the first bribe attempt made for the turn). So it's all complete mindfuckery, where you don't want to attack the castle that would be best for you, because surely the opponents will anticipate that, so you attack the second best one instead, but your opponent has anticipated that, so you get hosed. Or you decide not to raise armies at all, and instead just bribe the opponent's critical noble out from under his feet, but maybe he's guessed that too... on the other hand, if he spends money counter-bribing and you don't try to bribe, it's just a complete waste of money on his part. And so on. EDIT: Also, not at all a kingdom building or worker placement game, but Hoity-Toity aka By Hook or By Crook is an excellent, light simultaneous action game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 13:35
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Just got my copy of Citadels. I've played twice with the default 8 roles; which swaps are the most interesting? PaybackJack posted:I recall the Witch is good because the player still gets money or cards so it isn't as crippling as just being taken out of the game for a turn. Otherwise the rest are all just fun. I think mixing and matching is the best. Assassin totally blows and should always be replaced. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 15:23
|
|
|
St0rmD posted:There is a noticeable jump in difficulty between the "simulated" missions and the real mission tracks. I believe I mentioned that. My point was just that in reading other people's reports of the game they seemed to indicate that their first test run was crazy, and that they played 2-3 test runs and a few regular simulators, with a few failures. Based on that, I was kind of expecting to have to do more than just fire the guns a few times and not really worry about energy that much. In resolution we were like "oh, I guess we killed everything so we win?" But obviously I expect the real missions to be much harder.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 15:29
|
|
|
orphean posted:I hope there's a Space Alert expansion that adds in a space station. Space Station 13 in board game form would be pretty amazing. It basically is space station 13 already, all you would need to do is locked doors only certain roles can open and be able to turn players into battle bots. Computer maintenance can be resetting AI laws otherwise you draw action cards to find out what systems it is loving with each turn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 17:39
|
|
|
Speaking of the computer maintenance in Space Alert, does anyone know why that exists? It's such a dumb little arbitrary, unthematic element that even the rulebook makes fun of it ("Screen saver"). Why toss it into a game that is otherwise so tightly designed? What's it add except a slight difficulty increase that could be achieved in many other ways? Maybe he was running out of things to do with C actions were getting to be a little too worthless but surely he could have come up with something better than this? I mean it's Vlaada and the rest of the game is so well done that I'm willing to believe there's a good reason, but I'm just at a total loss as to what that reason could be. Or am I the only one who thinks it's questionable?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 18:18
|
|
|
What? It's beautifully thematic, forces the one last little organizational headache of getting someone to the bridge every few turns, and can severely cripple the ship but less so than forgetting to power the main reactor or what have you. edit: by beautifully thematic, I mean the ship is supposed to barely work, fly apart at the drop of a hat, and be piloted by trainees. How is a screensaver that cripples the ship out of character?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 18:21
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:What? It's beautifully thematic, forces the one last little organizational headache of getting someone to the bridge every few turns, and can severely cripple the ship but less so than forgetting to power the main reactor or what have you. It's not just a screen saver. It's a screen saver with advertisements for Corporation Inc. It's how their funding the project. It makes perfect sense! And 'computer maintenance'? I've always said you have to "jiggle the mouse". It's more fun that way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 18:51
|
|
|
McNerd posted:Speaking of the computer maintenance in Space Alert, does anyone know why that exists? It's such a dumb little arbitrary, unthematic element that even the rulebook makes fun of it ("Screen saver"). Why toss it into a game that is otherwise so tightly designed? What's it add except a slight difficulty increase that could be achieved in many other ways? Maybe he was running out of things to do with C actions were getting to be a little too worthless but surely he could have come up with something better than this? You're crazy. It's thematic as hell. I mean, the whole game is mired in bureacracy and layers of corporate interference. The company goes through recruits at such a fast rate that the instructors don't know whether or not they're giving a training seminar or a eulogy. Corporation Incorporated is either incompetent or malicious with respect to its practices and treatment of employees. The Sitting Duck itself must have been designed by the lowest bidder and built in an outsourced factory by underpaid child laborers. It's no coincidence that every exploration mission materializes in the middle of a gigantic enemy fleet and in an asteroid belt orbiting a black hole. The Sitting Duck has:
Naturally the ship has a screen saver featuring an advertisement of the company who built the goddamn thing. Of COURSE we can't disable it, that would be against company policy! It's not like you're doing anything on those missions, anyway; the ship's computer is the one recording the sector and doing all the work while you sit on your rear end. And then it makes perfect sense that the screen saver activation turns off the lights because of a glitch in the ship's computer that cannot comprehend that it would never begin a mission manned and suddenly become unmanned halfway through under the logic that "nobody postponed the screen saver therefore there is nobody on board." As a mechanic in a science fiction dark comedy, it's spot-on. It's straight out of Hitchhiker's Guide; the last hurrah of penny-pinching executives and poor quality assurance all around. As a mechanic in the game, it's great. It's a key reminder that throughout all the stress of death spiral you have to escape, no amount of ingenuity or teamwork can overcome the fact that your ship is a gigantic piece of poo poo. What's more, you have a job to do in the sector; it just turns out that survival is like a billion times harder than the job itself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 20:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
HopperUK posted:One of our number is passionately in love with Last Night On Earth so we switched. We've never come close to a zombie victory in that game. Do any of the expansions change that? Throw in Growing Hunger, the big box expansion. I've found the new scenarios/zombies/additional powers\handicaps balancing rules to get the game more in a balanced-to-zombie-friendly order.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 20:48
|
|
