|
Mister Sinewave posted:We're the kind of players where once someone sees/says the best option, there's no reason NOT to DO it (unless you in turn see a better one.) Yeah, it works best with a group of assertive players who actually want to help solve the puzzle. Pandemic definitely isn't the game to draw in someone who is passive or just wants to zone out.
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:46 |
|
|
My biggest issue with Pandemic is that the player roles are prescriptive. They make you so much better at some aspect of the game that they pretty much determine that one thing as the thing you will be doing all game unless there's a really pressing reason to give it to someone else. In almost every other coop game I play, assuming there's player specialization at all, it's either in a way that still requires you to interact with most of the game (e.g., in Ghost Stories, the player with the movement power will be better at going to crises, but they're still going to be collecting resources, interacting with villagers and exorcising ghosts.), or you can swap roles mid-game (like in Flash Point).
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
Ropes4u posted:Early giftmas prize from my blushing bride. Seriously doubt I will win many games of Go against her, but it's low set up time replay ability means it will hit the table often. This owns. Godspeed, gamer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:This owns. Godspeed, gamer. Yeah, doubleowns, good luck improving your skill in one of the greatest games.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
Ropes4u posted:Early giftmas prize from my blushing bride. Seriously doubt I will win many games of Go against her, but it's low set up time replay ability means it will hit the table often. (We're in Ask/Tell because TRADITION.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
Is there a website with a "master" list of what sorts of containers fit inside various game boxes? I want to organize some of my pieces a bit more but all I can find are some BGG opinions on which boxes may or may not fit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
Bobby The Rookie posted:What do you like about Castles of Burgundy? Dice-related stuff, passive aggression, building an estate on your game board? Building the estate, and passive aggression are mostly what I'm looking for. I've played agricola but it kind of put me to sleep. I'm mostly just a bit worried there isn't enough aggression in Burgundy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
 Some time ago I picked up Theseus: The Dark Orbit and holy poo poo did this game impress me. Not only was it fun (more on why later), but also elegant and the rules are really nicely written. It's a slightly odd mix of thematic yet abstract. for example, there are multiple boards and they represent ship modules / areas and have "rooms" separated by walls and doorways through which some rooms may or may not have line of sight to other rooms. Your units (each player has four) represent your faction. So far so sounding like a miniatures sci-fi game, but then the abstract comes in. Units don't literally represent actual individuals or squads. They just represent you having a "presence" in some higher level way. Units take damage but never "die". When a unit takes damage you lose life points from a common pool. Also movement is a little abstract - on your turn you can move any of your units but you move a number of spaces/modules (always clockwise) equal to the total number of units on the module that you started on. This opens all kinds of possibilities because you can influence / block / paint into a corner / crowd / funnel other players (and they you) by deciding which units to move or not move. If you don't know the game this probably sounds really  but it works and in practice isn't nearly as complicated as it sounds. But if you can accept the abstract/high-level bits there's a really rewarding game in there.The game comes with multiple factions (Marines, Aliens, Greys, Scientists, Pandora) and each play very differently despite having entirely common and straightforward rules. The Marines are best at straight up dealing damage and are good at it right away. The Alien faction are initially not very powerful but can grow far and wide and are good at ambush type attacks. Greys and Scientists have the goal of collecting Data Points (rather than strictly reducing enemies' Life Points) - for example the Scientists can set up video recorders in areas that gather data points each time an enemy unit passes through. There are definite strategic as well as tactical decisions to make, turns don't take forever because there are only so many units, and what other players do on their turn can affect you so it's still engaging even when it's not actually your turn. I liked playing a game and immediately thinking of what I was going to do differently next time. Your moves can have a bit of a chess-like feel to them since every move alters your possibilities as well as others'. It's a game where it's your turn and you go to make the play you were planning and suddenly tell the other player "oh, you  I just figured out what you did to me..."The slightly abstract parts can give new players a bit of a learning curve since not everything is intuitive, but happily the rules are very well written. It's always a good sign when there is a specific turn structure with distinct phases, and a clear indication of what happens in what phase (and when it is resolved.) It's surprising how many apparently ambiguous rule questions are quickly and clearly sorted out by referring to well-written rules. The Witcher and Earth Reborn both come to mind for this as well. The Eyes Have It fucked around with this message at 02:48 on Dec 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
Xom posted:Come play Go with goons! Should have known there was a thread, bookmarked and on the reading list. It's a great game that has been on my list for a while and one I know I will get my money's worth from.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
Ropes4u posted:Should have known there was a thread, bookmarked and on the reading list.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
PRADA SLUT posted:Is there a website with a "master" list of what sorts of containers fit inside various game boxes? Of course it depends on the size of the pieces but I use a lot of stuff from this website/page: http://www.consumercrafts.com/store/browse/catalog/storage-jewelry-organizers-and-bead-storage
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
So I have a chance to get my hands on a copy of the Dungeon Lords: Happy Anniversary edition. I've heard good things about the game but have never had a chance to play it. Is it a good game and would it be worth it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 03:45
|
|
|
Dr. VooDoo posted:So I have a chance to get my hands on a copy of the Dungeon Lords: Happy Anniversary edition. I've heard good things about the game but have never had a chance to play it. Is it a good game and would it be worth it? The game is spectacular.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:
I was interested in this game when it was just released. Rahdo praised it as a two player game at Rahdo Runs Through►►► Theseus: The Dark Orbit. Shut Up & Sit bashed it to the ground as a four player game at Shut Up & Sit Down Reviews: THESEUS. Already having too many two player games, too little time to play them (with work and everything) and also having all the other games to play with the regular 4 player group instead, I said "Oh well..." and moved on. I still wonder when I see someone talking about it. Though it rarely happens, if ever. Like this might be the first time anyone mentioned it on the three iterations of this thread I followed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Myrmidongs posted:Building the estate, and passive aggression are mostly what I'm looking for. I've played agricola but it kind of put me to sleep. I'm mostly just a bit worried there isn't enough aggression in Burgundy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
Dr. VooDoo posted:So I have a chance to get my hands on a copy of the Dungeon Lords: Happy Anniversary edition. I've heard good things about the game but have never had a chance to play it. Is it a good game and would it be worth it? Unless the others know better, I found that it really didn't play well with any other player count than four. That's eventually what made me sell it, not that it wasn't a really good game, but I needed more flexibility with the player count. Same with Chaos in the Old World.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
echoMateria posted:I was interested in this game when it was just released. Rahdo praised it as a two player game at Rahdo Runs Through►►► Theseus: The Dark Orbit. You really can't trust Rahdo's opinions on games. His videos can show how the game plays, but the guy loves every game he reviews, and a lot of them suck.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
For me, what makes Galaxy Trucker and Space Alert great is that the bad luck is hilarious. On the other hand, in Dominion, for instance, bad luck is just a downer. (Not limited to Dominion - this happens in lots of other games. In Settlers, for example.) Losing half my spaceship because the dice came up on exactly the right (wrong) number? My reaction is "Nooooooooooo. hahaha" Drawing all my +cards in one hand and knowing that all my +actions are coming up next without any drawing power while my opponent buys a province? My reaction is. "Well, I got hosed once again. Why do I even play this?" And I'm trying to put my finger on why. I mean, in both cases I just got hosed. But there's something about all my little meeples and cubes floating out into space that softens the blow in a way that Dominion can't. Maybe it's that thematic element that Dominion lacks. There's nothing funny about having a kingdom where the council rooms are far away from the villages. I also don't see why people in this thread bash on Settlers so much for the fact that the game doesn't guarantee you the rolls that you need to be competitive while the same isn't said about Dominion. If you get bad shuffles in Dominion, you're just as hosed as when nobody ever rolls 9's in Settlers. I'm hoping somebody can politely explain to me the difference without acting like I'm strangling your grandfather. It gets a bit prickly in here and I want to assure you that I'm not trying to bash anyone or any game. I do play Settlers and Dominion and like them both (although not as much as I love Galaxy Trucker). I'm just honestly looking for an answer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:I also don't see why people in this thread bash on Settlers so much for the fact that the game doesn't guarantee you the rolls that you need to be competitive while the same isn't said about Dominion. If you get bad shuffles in Dominion, you're just as hosed as when nobody ever rolls 9's in Settlers. I'm hoping somebody can politely explain to me the difference without acting like I'm strangling your grandfather. It gets a bit prickly in here and I want to assure you that I'm not trying to bash anyone or any game. I do play Settlers and Dominion and like them both (although not as much as I love Galaxy Trucker). I'm just honestly looking for an answer. For me, a large part of the difference is that there are exactly zero guarantees with the dice. Though unlikely, there is a possibility of 6 never coming up at all in a game. In Dominion, there is a guarantee that you will see each card in your deck each shuffle. While having a bad hand sucks, there are ways to setup later turns that just aren't possible in Settlers. For instance, not playing any draw actions when you know you have 2 gold, a silver, and something else remaining in your deck. You also have much more control over the random element. In Settlers, your only interaction with the random element is where you build or upgrade your settlements. In Dominion, you choose precisely what goes into your deck, and therefore ways to affect your draw. If you have to much dead weight, buy more trashing cards. Too many treasure cards? Buy draw cards or +buy cards. There are other problems with Settlers that aren't in Dominion, but the way randomness is certainly one of them. unpronounceable fucked around with this message at 06:29 on Dec 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 06:24
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:I also don't see why people in this thread bash on Settlers so much for the fact that the game doesn't guarantee you the rolls that you need to be competitive while the same isn't said about Dominion. If you get bad shuffles in Dominion, you're just as hosed as when nobody ever rolls 9's in Settlers. I'm hoping somebody can politely explain to me the difference without acting like I'm strangling your grandfather. It gets a bit prickly in here and I want to assure you that I'm not trying to bash anyone or any game. I do play Settlers and Dominion and like them both (although not as much as I love Galaxy Trucker). I'm just honestly looking for an answer. I think the short version would be that even if you've got a bad hand in Dominion you're still going to be doing something with it. If a roll in Catan doesn't come up with one of your numbers you're just poo poo out of luck; you get literally nothing, and you sit on your hands until your luck improves. That's kind of a specific facet of the overarching games though. Barring the fact that they're totally different genres, Catan is basically decided at the start of the game. You come into it knowing what the bell curve of 2d6 looks like, and once the board is set up you can fairly easily point out what are basically the objectively best locations for your two starting settlements. After that initial decision though, you're still just at the whim of the dice. So ultimately what you've got is an immediate obvious choice at the start of the game, and then it's luck all the way down after that point. Neither of those are good design elements. Conversely in Dominion while you might get a bad hand once in a while you've always got agency. You're the one deciding exactly how to play things out and build your engine with what's available. There are obviously still going to be games where you say "if my luck wasn't so poo poo at this key moment I would have clinched it," but nowhere near to the same degree as Catan, a game which is pure luck once post-setup play has begun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
Yeah, games where you're at the mercy of randomness tend to drive me up a wall if they take more than 15 minutes. On the other hand, give me a way to mitigate it and I'm totally fine with it. Castles of Burgundy is good for this and even Eldritch Horror gives you enough ways to buff dice rolls to make me happy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 06:34
|
|
|
There's also the fact that once you discard your useless hand it generally won't be very long before you're playing your new, hopefully useful draw. Settlers can kind of drag between turns, while Dominion tends to be snappier barring the guy who buys a lot of villages.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:There's also the fact that once you discard your useless hand it generally won't be very long before you're playing your new, hopefully useful draw. Settlers can kind of drag between turns, while Dominion tends to be snappier barring the guy who buys a lot of villages. I think this is what directs the ire against Settlers. I'm willing to bet that anyone here who's played Settlers, especially if it was one of the first modernish board games they've played, liked it the first game or two. But then anyone who has played it more than a couple times has run into The Game That Wouldn't End. Where the dice, town/road placement, and cessation of trades result in a game eclipsing two hours, with turn after turn spent HOPING for someone to just provide closure. That is when the sense of fun dies. I don't think Dominion is a good game to compare to Settlers. I think Carcassonne and Castles of Burgundy are. One is simple, the other complex, but both still take the expand-and-build theme of Settlers, and both handle luck (drawing tiles and rolling dice) far more elegantly than Settlers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 07:08
|
|
|
I love Settlers to death, and I agree that most of those criticisms are valid. The RNG can be a fickle mistress. A large part of the strategy is making sure you get something on as many numbers as possible. A really bad board layout can make the first turn critical. You can mitigate that by using the "default" layout as much as possible, or googling for balanced board layouts to use. (The default layout is really quite good overall.) So yeah, it has some issues. However, I don't agree with it being The Game That Just Won't End. I've played scores, maybe even hundreds, of games of Settlers and have only seen the game drag like that a handful times. It can happen, but it doesn't happen often. New players tend to trade, which avoids that issue. Experienced players tend to squirrel away some dev cards that can be used to claim anywhere from 2-5 VP in a single turn. Most of the games I play these days end quite suddenly when someone manages to claim Longest Road and pulls out a timely Monopoly. Or something along those lines. In other news, I played my first full round of Galaxy Trucker today with my son. This game is a blast. The build phase is frantic and fun! Making fun of each other's ships is even more fun! And then watching the ships get blown to bits is the most fun of all. We did all three normal rounds, and then did round III-A for the hell of it. On round III-A, we both ended up with just a couple of components left. No guns, no engines, no crew. Just a cargo bay, some pipes, and for me, a shield without batteries. The very last card was Open Space and we had to give up. The ship in round III-A is hilarious. I thought, hey, it looks like the Enterprise! So it has to be good, right? Right? There's all sorts of great places for engines and guns and everything! Nope. Iwas wrong. So wrong. If you manage to lose the middle piece of Row 6, literally half your ship gets thrown in the trash. Similar fates can befall either "nacell" area--which coincidentally are the only things between that critical Row 6 middle piece and every meteor and pirate in the galaxy. I lost my port nacell to a meteor, then that connector in the middle to a pirate. That game is a blast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 07:33
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:On round III-A, we both ended up with just a couple of components left. No guns, no engines, no crew. Just a cargo bay, some pipes, and for me, a shield without batteries. The very last card was Open Space and we had to give up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 07:40
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:This shouldn't be possible, for the reason I highlighted. If you ran out of crew, you are out of the race for that round. Oh, I thought your stuff still coasted along and you got something. We'll know better next time!
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
Anyone gotten their hands on Mountains of Madness for EH yet? I know I'm gonna pick it up since I love the hell out of Eldritch...but I'm wondering just how awesome it is and if I need to run and get it as soon my FLGS gets it in or if I can wait til New Year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 09:19
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Anyone gotten their hands on Mountains of Madness for EH yet? I know I'm gonna pick it up since I love the hell out of Eldritch...but I'm wondering just how awesome it is and if I need to run and get it as soon my FLGS gets it in or if I can wait til New Year. I probably won't be able to play it until Wednesday - I'm off to binge on Imperial Assault today and see how that's like - but I will be able to take a look inside the expansion. From what I've heard it's solid, I just don't know if it's enough to justify buying a big box expansion or if it risks ruining the things that make EH more desirable than AH.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 10:44
|
|
|
Played 2 games of Abyss this weekend. The host had picked it up in Essen, and played a couple of games, the other two players were new. Second game took barely an hour. The pitch is that the players are trying to be elected by an undersea council as the rulers of the Abyss, by gathering the support of the Lords, Allies and a couple of other things. Lords give lots of VPs, and the game ends one player buys 7 of them, so they are the main focus. Basically a light point salad game. In their turn, a player can do three things: 1) Explore, which means to draw 5 Allies (the cards you can use to pay for Lords) from a deck, picking up one (you can only take one before drawing the next card) 2) buy up a lord by paying up cards (of 5 different colours and valued 1 to 5 each) from their hand, matching both point cost and colour criteria of the Lord (using only cards of a single colour, using cards of 3 colours including a particular one, using cards of all 5 colours, etc...) or 3) take the allies of one colour that haven't been picked up in earlier explorations, which are put on decks on the board after each exploration phase. There are a few complications in each mechanic: - Lords may have a permanent ability (ignore the color requirements of Lords) or one-shot, that happens n purchase (every opponent discards an Ally from their hand). - Lords may also have keys printed on their cards. Once you have 3 keys, you get a Location, which are mostly point multipliers (2 points for each Lord of one colour), but also blocks the abilities of the Lords that "buy" the location. Some abilities are very powerful and it reflects on the high cost/low VPs of the matching Lord, so buying one of these as your third key is a bad move. - Players can buy 1 card per turn that other player is drawing on their exploration phase. Price goes 1 Pearl (money in this game), 2 pearls for the second card, etc.. - My favorite rule is that each time you buy a Lord, you "Affiliate" the lowest-value ally you've used to buy it. That means you keep the card in front of you, instead of discarding it like the rest you’ve used. At the end of the game, you score the highest valued card of each colour you have in front of you. That means that you want to use high cards to buy Lords, and those are at a premium, especially as the high value ones are kept on the table instead of being put back in the discard pile. - While exploring, you may encounter a monster and fight it as your action for the turn, getting bigger prizes as the number of monsters that player decide not to fight increases. - You can use money to buy Lords, to supplement the value of your allies if you’re short of value. So, opinion. First of all, the game is gorgeous. The lords are all different and well drawn, the board is pretty and functional and the money are actual (fake) pearls held in cups, rather than cardboard tokens. The cups are made of cheap black plastic, but everything else is a joy to look at and play with. Game seems pretty swingy, yet with some resource management. Getting lucky in the Exploration phase is a huge boon, and drawing locations matching your assets also help, but I feel that there are some skill in there involved with finding the balance between using only high level cards and using enough to get what you want without spending too many pearls. There are a couple of push your luck mechanics, like knowing when to cut your losses and pick a medium-value ally during exploration instead of giving your opponents a chance to get a high value one. There are also choices to be made regarding when to buy a location and close your Lords skills, and some skill in getting just enough allies for your plans, without being dragged down by low value ones. I’ll have to play it a few more times to decide one way or the other, but so far it’s a quick to play, easy to teach game that has some depth, or at least the illusion of it. No pun intended.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 11:00
|
|
|
Stelas posted:I probably won't be able to play it until Wednesday - I'm off to binge on Imperial Assault today and see how that's like - but I will be able to take a look inside the expansion. From what I've heard it's solid, I just don't know if it's enough to justify buying a big box expansion or if it risks ruining the things that make EH more desirable than AH. From what I've seen said on FFG's forums, MoM dodges the problem by making most of the new content either exclusive to the Old Ones in Antarctica or things that you just mix in with existing decks much like Forsaken Lore. So it looks like it's dodging the bloat of Arkham Horror handily.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 11:07
|
|
|
Yeah, I've heard that as well, but this is FFG and I'm not sure I'm going to believe it until I see it with my own eyes. If I get a chance I'll poke through it today.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 11:25
|
|
|
A thought occurred to me regarding BattleCON and Yomi that make me feel the two are even less comparable than they are. Once Upon a Time, Broken Loose talked about how he plays 2D fighters of the Video Game variety, so Yomi/BattleCON kind of lose their relevance. I thought about that...and kind of wonder how it holds true to BattleCON, actually. BattleCON keeps up the appearance of a 2D fighter, but Yomi definitely takes home the "abstracting feeling like a 2D fighter award." BattleCON, however, gets this weird and possibly unintentional side-effect of being a game that isn't totally trying to be how a fighting game feels on card; as such it gets to do some interesting things that strictly don't work in a video fighting game. BattleCON is more like if a 2D fighter was played in some weird freeze-frame, tool-assisted mode where dexterity was removed completely but no core mechanic was put in to replace this removal other than making complex characters (maybe). It's essentially a different game idea as a result. I can't argue which is better (or if I did I'd probably concede Yomi as a better-executed design maybe). I enjoy BattleCON a ton because of my perverse glee in exploring new game mechanics*, and holy poo poo BattleCON has dozens and dozens of characters and isn't afraid to drastically alter the game mechanics for their unique abilities.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 11:27
|
|
|
Having decided to buy the Babel expansion to 7 Wonders for someone for Christmas, it just seems silly when I'm standing there and it costs £27 for a somewhat small addition to a game, and new highly rated games sit by either cheaper (Splendor) or a bit more expensive games (Suburbia and many others) sit by which offer something completely new for a little bit more. Goddamn you board games, why price your expansions so high? I look at the other expansions for games I have (Pandemic, Carcassonne, Escape) and their minor mechanic adding functions are nearly full price. Very hard to consider it worth the money to pick up. The RRP of £30 on an Escape expansion is an absolute joke.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 11:51
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:Having decided to buy the Babel expansion to 7 Wonders for someone for Christmas, it just seems silly when I'm standing there and it costs £27 for a somewhat small addition to a game, and new highly rated games sit by either cheaper (Splendor) or a bit more expensive games (Suburbia and many others) sit by which offer something completely new for a little bit more. Goddamn you board games, why price your expansions so high? I look at the other expansions for games I have (Pandemic, Carcassonne, Escape) and their minor mechanic adding functions are nearly full price. Very hard to consider it worth the money to pick up. The RRP of £30 on an Escape expansion is an absolute joke. I got to play with the Babel expansion at my FLGS' last game night, and it seems to add a LOT to the game, it's basically two mini expansions in one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 11:54
|
|
|
Do you think it adds enough to the base game to be worth getting over another game? Genuine question, not loaded. The additions looks interesting but by the looks of it you'd only play the Tower or the Projects and they just add another consideration when selecting cards. Which has big consequences and all but doesn't look that game altering.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 12:20
|
|
|
What do you guys think about the Lord of the Rings LCG re: quaterbacking?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 12:43
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:Do you think it adds enough to the base game to be worth getting over another game? Genuine question, not loaded. The additions looks interesting but by the looks of it you'd only play the Tower or the Projects and they just add another consideration when selecting cards. Which has big consequences and all but doesn't look that game altering. I've only played 7 wonders 3 times now, but from how those who have played a lot more were reacting, the guy who had bought Babel was not at all displeased with his purchase. If there's something else you've got your eye on, Babel can wait, and if you let it get a bit older I'm sure some discount deals will pop up on it. But I sure had a fun time with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 13:09
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:Do you think it adds enough to the base game to be worth getting over another game? Genuine question, not loaded. The additions looks interesting but by the looks of it you'd only play the Tower or the Projects and they just add another consideration when selecting cards. Which has big consequences and all but doesn't look that game altering. I'm not a huge fan of the Babel expansion (haven't tried the Projects, just the tower). We regularly play with both Leaders and Cities, and while those give you extra things to do and help provide direction to your strategy, I feel like Babel gives you too much. To me, it added a bit too much complication to a game that was actually pretty elegant. I'll try it out a few more times just to make sure, but I'm not in any kind of rush to do so.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:Oh, I thought your stuff still coasted along and you got something. You still get credits for your cargo, but rounded down.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:46 |
|
|
enigmahfc posted:You still get credits for your cargo, but rounded down. Half credits, that is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 15:36
|
|