|
Some Numbers posted:Absolutely start using the expansion. The base game will wear out its welcome very very quickly, but the expansion does a lot to extend the game's shelf life. About the expansion, all of the new techs have warfare or research costs. Do you replace the old techs with the new ones, throw them all into the pile with no changes, or add them all in but use warfare or research to buy them like the new tech? Still have to introduce it to my usual gaming group, but it won't meet for another couple of weeks at least. Should I play at least one game with them base or just throw everything in at once? Starting the game with different cards from everyone else and a level 3 tech sounds neat. Even with 8 cards in my hand and a planet with a research symbol, I never managed to get 7 at once.
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 22:17 |
|
|
QnoisX posted:About the expansion, all of the new techs have warfare or research costs. Do you replace the old techs with the new ones, throw them all into the pile with no changes, or add them all in but use warfare or research to buy them like the new tech? No, yes and yes. The new techs are in addition to the base techs and they can be bought with either Research symbols or Fighters. quote:Still have to introduce it to my usual gaming group, but it won't meet for another couple of weeks at least. Should I play at least one game with them base or just throw everything in at once? Starting the game with different cards from everyone else and a level 3 tech sounds neat. Even with 8 cards in my hand and a planet with a research symbol, I never managed to get 7 at once.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:The thing that had me discouraged was Rahdo's description of having the same kingdom every time and then maybe removing cards from it? I guess I'm not clear on how the kingdom is generated since I wasn't playing close attention and should probably look it up. He was talking about the buildings you can build with merchants, and I agree with his opinion on them. IIIRC there are only like 18 or so you can build and you're supposed to have all them laid out ala Caverna. Like you and Rahdo, I think that is not enough variety for many repeat plays, heck it's not even enough to do variable setups past 2 players. That is the only issue stopping me from forking over the 60 bucks for the deluxe edition. Edit: It didn't stop me; I am so weak  The auctual deck building aspect is really nifty though. You build a bag full of different types of worker chits that can be used to activate different places on the board. You can also dump them on major projects for more points to thin you bag. Durendal fucked around with this message at 12:21 on Jan 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
What is the thread consensus on Jaipur?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:No, yes and yes. The new techs are in addition to the base techs and they can be bought with either Research symbols or Fighters. Some Numbers posted:New players should play without the expansion to get their heads around the mechanics, but the expansion is a better game. Anyone know where I could get some tiny stickers printed out? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
QnoisX posted:Ah, that makes sense. Too bad they didn't include a sticker sheet to add those icons onto the cards. That would be a nice reminder. They still keep their default second resource, right? Most of the new ones have ships as the second icon. That would be annoying actually.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:03
|
|
|
MildManeredManikin posted:What is the thread consensus on Jaipur? In short, it's a fantastic two player game. Seriously can't recommend it enough. I convinced my store to start carrying it even though I knew it probably wouldn't sell there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
MildManeredManikin posted:What is the thread consensus on Jaipur? I'm not sure there's a consensus. It's a light 2-player trading game that I enjoy since I can play it with gamers and non-gamers. Hanabi and whichever version of Bohnanza supports two might work for you, both are a bit more involved. I played Hanabi today with a new player, and when somebody just doesn't get anything and/or pays 0 attention it ruins your whole game pretty fast. (I've played with new players many times, mistakes are common and expected but I at least expect the player to be awake). QnoisX posted:Anyone know where I could get some tiny stickers printed out? rchandra fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Jan 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
All the talk in the thread today led to me playing Lords of Waterdeep for the first time today (convinced my housemate and fellow goon Krysmphoenix to break out their Secret Santa copy)...I see what everyone means about the theme being completely irrelevant. It was 2 rounds in before I was just asking for cubes instead of Fighters and Clerics. (I did name all my meeples though). For my first forray into Worker Placement I rather enjoyed it...Would definitely like to play it with more people though, with 2, there wasn't a whole lot of Intrigue happening and the "using someone else's building, thus giving them a reward" only happened once.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:10
|
|
|
Lorini posted:Just so people know, the organizer pays a fee to meetup.com to organize the meetup, so they tend to be more social in order to make it worthwhile. There's no point in paying a bunch of money to hang out with yourself Everyone who owns a copy of Hornet Leader just got a little sad.  silvergoose posted:A wsj link some might enjoy. Packers of Catan posted:The game’s object is to build settlements on the board using “resource” cards. Think of it as a fantasy version of Monopoly. Goddammit WSJ, you rag.  Edit: quote:The rules of the game can be complex—making it all the funnier that the Packers have embraced it. 
PerniciousKnid fucked around with this message at 04:26 on Jan 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:20
|
|
.
|
Catan is pretty firmly in the fantasy genre, I mean just look at all the fantastic things in it like, uh, buildings and resources.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:22
|
|
|
QnoisX posted:About the expansion, all of the new techs have warfare or research costs. Do you replace the old techs with the new ones, throw them all into the pile with no changes, or add them all in but use warfare or research to buy them like the new tech? Some Numbers posted:No, yes and yes. The new techs are in addition to the base techs and they can be bought with either Research symbols or Fighters. Er, Some Numbers misspoke: No, yes, and no. The old technologies can still only be purchased with research. Only the new technology can be purchased with fighters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:27
|
|
|
Bohnanza's two player rules are pretty bad. Its a good game otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
I never watched the Rahdo video, but in at least half of our Orleans games, the person who won built no buildings at all won. They aren't mandatory. The lack of replayability never honestly crossed my mind, noting that one of my top 10 games is Ora et Labora, a game that basically has the same stuff every time. My biggest worry is that the cardboard chits will become worn out and/or deformed and that will ruin the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
Gutter Owl posted:Er, Some Numbers misspoke: No, yes, and no. The old technologies can still only be purchased with research. Only the new technology can be purchased with fighters. Oh, good call, I misread that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:I'm not sure I understand. The new techs can be used for an Action or can be used to Boost whatever role matches the symbols on the tech in question. Yeah, there's just new versions of some of the old techs with ship symbols instead of one of the role symbols as the second icon. But I guess it doesn't matter. Page 6 of the expansion rules says, "You may never spend ships to research technologies that do not have ships in their printed cost (e.g. technologies from the base game)." Didn't see that the first time I read through it. It's a bit odd to do it that way, but I guess they do have versions of the old techs with ships as a cost. So I guess you can't go total Warfare if you want those base game techs that aren't duplicated in the expansion. Wonder if that was a design choice or if they just didn't want to print a ton of errata cards (it came with 3 already, but my copy of the base game had fixed copies already) or stickers or something. Ah, I take too long to make posts...
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
QnoisX posted:Yeah, there's just new versions of some of the old techs with ship symbols instead of one of the role symbols as the second icon. But I guess it doesn't matter. Page 6 of the expansion rules says, "You may never spend ships to research technologies that do not have ships in their printed cost (e.g. technologies from the base game)." Didn't see that the first time I read through it. It's a bit odd to do it that way, but I guess they do have versions of the old techs with ships as a cost. So I guess you can't go total Warfare if you want those base game techs that aren't duplicated in the expansion. Wonder if that was a design choice or if they just didn't want to print a ton of errata cards (it came with 3 already, but my copy of the base game had fixed copies already) or stickers or something. Those techs count as a ship of that type towards paying costs with ships, I believe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
The ones you can buy with Fighters have different world type prerequistes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
Lorini posted:I never watched the Rahdo video, but in at least half of our Orleans games, the person who won built no buildings at all won. They aren't mandatory. The lack of replayability never honestly crossed my mind, noting that one of my top 10 games is Ora et Labora, a game that basically has the same stuff every time. My biggest worry is that the cardboard chits will become worn out and/or deformed and that will ruin the game. They are pretty close to the meeples instead of chits stretch goal if that helps. All in all, I'm going to end up backing to deluxe version - the game just hits to many of my buttons. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
Yep, so no expansion for newbies! Hopefully I can convince them to give it several plays next session. Also have Legendary Encounters, so probably depends on which one they enjoy more. I was hoping to play that today too, but my sleeves won't be here till probably tomorrow. Two day shipping only works if you don't take two days to stick it in the mail.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Wow that WSJ article about the Packers and Catan has some hidden gems. quote:“At first we’re like, ‘What the hell is this? Brick? Wool? What kind of game is this?’” quote:Packers center Garth Gerhart was intrigued by the game, because teammates were “talking about it all the time, all the different strategies.” He wasn’t expecting such cutthroat competition until he sat down with them two weeks ago and, he said, longtime players ensured his failure. “Everyone is super competitive, so when you first start playing they don’t tell you all the rules. So you start your moves and they say ‘well, actually you can’t do that’ and it sort of screws you in the game,” Gerhart said. “They get very salty.” quote:Perillo, in passing, mentioned on a local radio show that he and his teammates had played the game the night before. Pat Fuge, who runs Gnome Games, a Green Bay game store, was flooded with texts and calls about it. Packers have occasionally come into Gnome Games—where the events include Pokémon and Magic: The Gathering releases—but those players were there to buy backgammon or other basic games
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 05:24
|
|
|
MildManeredManikin posted:What is the thread consensus on Jaipur? Can't say what the overall consensus is, but I picked it up at the recommendation of this thread because I needed a two player game. I think it's really good. It's light but strategic, simple to play, with a surprisingly strong economic theme. It has nice components and excellent visual design. Sure, it has a fair bit of randomness as it is based on drawing things from a deck and a center market of cards, but the inclusion of the camels gives players some choice and control over that randomness as well as the ability to accrue resources if their opponent overreaches. If you want to learn the rules, Watch it Played! has a video on it, with only one very minor rules hiccup: Players are allowed to keep the amount of camels in their herds secret, so you don't have to have them spread out like that. Of course, I suppose you could spread them out if you'd like.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
I've actually played it a few times at cafes and such and I enjoyed it, I was just wondering what people in here thought. I played it a while ago and not that many times so I guess more specifically I was wondering if it was a situation where it got stale fast or if there has been another game that has made it obsolete. The context here is that I was recommending it to somebody and I wanted to make sure I wasn't giving a bad rec. Thanks for all the responses!
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
Azran posted:Hey guys, for a 10 player game of Resistance, which roles should we avoid/not use because they aren't fun? Don't use: Sergeant Module Commander without Assassin Body Guard without False Commander Deep Agent without Pretender Hunter Module with newer players Both Rogues at the same time (in theory, I cannot confirm personally if this sucks) Hunter AND Assassin in a group that doesn't completely understand both 2 Blue Chiefs + Coordinator without at least 2 Blue "Don't want to say who I am" roles (like Pretender, Rogue, Defector, etc) 6 named Blue roles at once outside of maximum Hunter I mean, it's a lot of common sense things, also with 8 modules and like 50 characters it's hard to measure the effect on your meta of individual additions without any information on your group. Broken Loose fucked around with this message at 05:59 on Jan 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
Thanks, that is indeed what I went with when I made my proxy cards. Good to know my gut feel was right. They were annoyed at the idea of not playing Mafia since "it was fun to dogpile people". Now they ask me to play it every team we meet up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 06:17
|
|
|
This Drive Thru Reviews guy is pretty decent at going over the rules. I've only watched a couple videos so far, but it seems to have decent editing and close ups of the pieces and he doesn't ramble on too much when going over the actual rules. He also looks like he might be related to Jim Gaffigan and I want to hear him talk about hot pockets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 06:25
|
|
|
I once showed off Cuba Libre and someone asked if it was like Risk.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 06:43
|
|
|
Shadow225 posted:This is the reason I don't really care to pick up any Vlaada games. From the outside looking in, it sounds like everything but Mage Knight, which looks long and fiddly, and Tash Kalar, which looks awesome, is designed to screw you. I cannot convince myself it sounds appealing. Space Alert does not screw you at all. It presents you with all the information you could want about a winnable scenario, gives you more than enough resources to handle it, and lets you plan out all of your moves in advance. It is, however, quite possible that you will screw yourself in spite of the game's boundless generosity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 08:20
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:I once showed off Cuba Libre and someone asked if it was like Risk. This made me tear up. Such a terrible thing to say about such a fantastic game
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 09:21
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:The thing that had me discouraged was Rahdo's description of having the same kingdom every time and then maybe removing cards from it? I guess I'm not clear on how the kingdom is generated since I wasn't playing close attention and should probably look it up. My worry is that you managed to watch at least an hour of videos about Orleans and thought it had cards in it. The variance in Orleans comes from the random distribution of goods on the map and the random order of events within a fixed game length. If most of the high-value goods are at the south end of the board, goods collection becomes less efficient; if all three Market Day events come out early, building trade posts becomes less effective. The former variance can help determine your initial strategy, but the latter can force you to change it. The winner will be the person who is best able to adapt their strategy to meet the pattern of the game while keeping it focused enough to carry out their main plan efficiently.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 09:47
|
|
|
Trip report from last night's gaming meet: Started off with 2-player Gloom. Played this a couple of years ago and quite enjoyed it, but not enough to buy it. Lost by a narrow margin as one of my family was killed off early with a card that reset all the modifiers to 0 and had a couple of turns I had to pass on because there was literally nothing I could play that would benefit me or hinder the other player. I like the story-telling aspect of it but it reminded me of Munchkin in some rsepects, with every single card being different and a lot of that "No, gently caress YOU." gameplay. Watched a group set-up and play Battle at Kemble's Cascade while I had my dinner. I say play, in the time it took me to eat my burger and finish my pint the guy hadn't finished explaining the rules, definitely seemed like this was the first time he'd set the game up (we set up Caverna quicker than he set up Kemble's) and his rules explanation was basically him just reading the rulebook verbatim. He seemed to be in a genuine panic, flicking through the rulebook like crazy and visibly sweating  4-player Caverna thankfully rescued me. 3 of us were new players, took 3 hours in total with a couple of breaks to get drinks etc. Got my dwarves out adventuring early, but lost momentum towards the middle and had to spend a few turns consolidating my food production and making my empty board spaces useful. Managed to grab points in the final few rounds but I was too far behind by then and did unfortunately come in last. Not that fussed though, was my first game and the sheer variety of available actions and rooms was just bewildering. I took me several games of Agricola for me to really like it so I figure it's the same for Caverna. I think I slightly prefer the more stressful nature of The 'Gric though. Feeding my dwarves in Caverna just felt like a neccesary nuisance, in Agricola I find it really rewarding to get the farm's food production to that self-sufficient stage. Would definitely play again though. Finished off with a 2-player game of Pandemic. One of the guys we played Caverna with had bought it for Christmas for him and his wife and wanted to play it at the game night first before teaching his wife. Since Pandemic is a favourite of mine I walked him through the setup and the turn structure. Got Scientist and Operations Expert as roles, a bit of an odd pair really, and we lost when the Delhi/Kolkata area went crazy with chain outbreaks. Still, he really enjoyed it was very thankful to be taught the game. Overall a very enjoyable night, would have been 10/10 A++ would game again but when discussing similarities between Caverna and Agricola, the game owner kept calling it "Agree-cola" and that just really bugged me. Zveroboy fucked around with this message at 10:29 on Jan 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 10:25
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:I once showed off Cuba Libre and someone asked if it was like Risk. I've had people ask the same about Pandemic. And Twilight Struggle. If it has a world map, it's gotta be risk, right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 13:32
|
|
|
we will all be happier people if we accept that for many people, something from Parker Brothers or Hasbro are the only "board games" they know. At least Wal-Marts and Targets stock Settlers of Catan and Dominion now, maybe one of the uninitiated will stumble across a good game like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
I'm hopefully playing Fiasco tomorrow night (first time in person), anybody got any experiences they'd like to share?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 13:38
|
|
|
Shadow225 posted:This is the reason I don't really care to pick up any Vlaada games. From the outside looking in, it sounds like everything but Mage Knight, which looks long and fiddly, and Tash Kalar, which looks awesome, is designed to screw you. I cannot convince myself it sounds appealing. Yeah, a running theme in Vlaada games is "this board is trying to murder you, and is very good at it". You have to sort of approach the game with the attitude of accepting that you're going to see casualties, and try to find amusement in the chaos of it all. I think that's a little easier to do in games like Galaxy Trucker or Space Alert, which have a bit of slapstick to the way their various catastrophes play out. Dungeon Lords is really fun, but I tend to take it a little more personally when things go sideways because it requires a degree of meticulousness to get all the resources you need. Mage Knight is long, but not as fiddly as it looks. Most of those tokens are static on the board until you kill them, and the rest are just resources that pass between your own pool and a bank. Other than that, it's the usual lineup cycling that many deck builders have.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 14:15
|
|
|
bowmore posted:I'm hopefully playing Fiasco tomorrow night (first time in person), anybody got any experiences they'd like to share? Choose a mundane playset. I've had way better experiences when playing a housewife in suburbia committing arson than I've had playing a janitor in an antarctic research station stuck in a long distance love triangle. It's way more fun when the baseline is something familiar. The weirder the setting, the more distracting it is. Also, frame scenes efficiently. I've had way too many games drag for too long when players start scenes without any idea what they wanted to do in the scene or refuse to end scenes even after the dramatic potential of the scene was exhausted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 14:19
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:Wow that WSJ article about the Packers and Catan has some hidden gems. Some parts of this article definitely sound like they were written fifteen years ago. I don't know if that is because it's Green Bay, or the Wall Street Journal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 14:21
|
|
|
bowmore posted:I'm hopefully playing Fiasco tomorrow night (first time in person), anybody got any experiences they'd like to share? If you're not used to storygames, you may find that this is a good rule to follow: At the beginning of the scene, once you've decided if you're setting the scene, or the group is, whoever is setting the scene should announce in pretty clear terms what is going on there, and why. It helps make it more clear when the pivot point for the white or black die actually occurs, because that should be based on the what and why. If you just go into a scene all "x people are at y place, improv theater" you're likely to end up with some kind of wishy-washy plot points, especially in the first half. Whereas "X people are at y place, person z ((wants the thing to happen, doesn't want the others to notice a thing, etc))" gives a more concrete point for something to actually happen- the scene will pivot on whether person z gets what they want, and it comes down to the contents of the scene itself before that pivot whether it happens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 14:24
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Some parts of this article definitely sound like they were written fifteen years ago. I don't know if that is because it's Green Bay, or the Wall Street Journal. Because someone wrote this and hasn't even heard of Wits and Wagers or Say Anything. Also Green Bay.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 14:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 22:17 |
|
|
My first and only game so far of Caverna ended with me on 55 points and my opponent had 45 or so. Just wondering how those scores were for new players who barely knew the rules and only picked up buildings at the end, so no minmaxing of any kind took place. Oh my board game life. Excitedly get TK expansion for Christmas, more family orientated games took up the festive period, now I have noone to try the expansion deck with! Bah!
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 14:28
|
|
