|
Tepoko summed up the problem with Dead of Winter pretty well from what I remember, particularly around the goals. So I watched the Tabletop episode, and I have a question because I think they got a rule wrong and yes that is something they always do but I just want to check in this case. Wil is given a medicine card by Grant and says to camera he needs it for his victory condition. I'm pretty sure any item you are given, you have to use immediately, but he said he would use it for his personal goal, so I'm going to assume he did. Which is wrong isn't it? Only reason I remember was because I thought it was a stupid rule.
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:55 |
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Basically some games need money or something to keep maniacs from defining their own win conditions Our group throws a dollar in the pot every time we play Cosmic Encounter. If someone wins solo, they get the money. If more than one person wins, the money stays. Last time we played, we considered having all people who win in a group victory each throw a dollar into the pot. Of course, it doesn't completely prevent group victories, but it at least makes people consider winning solo for more than just the glory, even though the incentive is more for bragging about how much money you won rather than actually getting the money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:Tepoko summed up the problem with Dead of Winter pretty well from what I remember, particularly around the goals. You're right, they're wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
I enjoy Dead of Winter, but there is at least one total bullshit objective, and I got it the first time I played. That is the objective to have the most survivors on your team when the game ends, as a good guy. Somebody else got the fireman, who is good at rescuing people. Every single item search deck has the exact same likeliness of finding survivors, so unlike other objectives where you need to have a lot of something, you can't stick around in one place where it's more likely to happen. When I mentioned this problem, there were a glut of people who were like 'no there's totally a solution'. Such as 'find things that make it easier that you get pretty much entirely at random and as such can't influence getting it' or "just start trying to kill off people from other players and hope you don't get exiled or tank the entire game with all of the lowered morale."
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
Gort posted:Well, what happens if the team's probably going to win, but you've no way of doing your "something else"? Is it better for you to lose alone, or is it better for you to tank the game for everyone so everyone loses with you? This is the quandary I posed to my group after one round of Dead of Winter because the win conditions for that game really just do not make sense to me from either a co-operative or competitive standpoint. I don't think we ever really came to consensus over how it's meant to be played so much as the group was just "Huh, yeah that's actually a good point. Didn't think of it like that.". We still haven't gone back and played a second round of it and I think it's probably just because our group collectively has no idea what to make of the win conditions. We don't like house ruling games or agreeing to play in the least offensive way possible because that's never been our style, so I think the solution we've landed on was just...don't play Dead of Winter. It's a crying shame too because while I think DoW still wouldn't be very good with some sort of improved victory state (I have no idea what that would look like mind you), it would at least be playable. As it stands I've never seen a game be so strong in theming but absolutely fail to compute as a game with a group and with me. chemosh6969 posted:Otherwise you're going to be the guy in their stories of "we were all having fun playing this game but the one guy didn't like it and was being an rear end the entire time" and "we talked before he showed up and all wanted to play this one game but we knew he didn't like it and would start complaining and want to play some other game he says in superior but none of us care for". I am fairly certain I am "that guy" and also the reason Betrayal At House On The Hill doesn't get played anymore. I am completely okay with this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
IMO the moneyless Poker problem is less about people craving flashy wins and more about seeing they're too behind in matchsticks or whatever they measure non-money with, and decide then can as well go all YOLO, have fun doing so and either miraculously return to a decent position or reset the matchstick count so that they can go for the win again. It's the exact same way of thinking that makes people do dumb poo poo when behind in unwinnable/kingmaker position and bored, but offering the temptation of immediate salvation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
parasyte posted:This seems a bit weird since the game is full co-op anyway more than half the time (between 54.5% and 60% depending on player count). No it's not. The rules are very clear that only people who achieve all their objectives are winners. This leads to very odd player behaviour like preventing the group goal from being completed even though you aren't a traitor because you haven't completed your own secret goal yet. The full co-op variant is co-op because it completely removes the secret objectives. The main game is a free-for-all, traitor or not. As other posters have said the victory conditions in Dead of Winter just don't stand up to any level of scrutiny or competitive play.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
Are there any good co-op zombie apocalypse survivor games?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
Munchkin. It feels like an apocalypse and only braindeads play it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:gently caress. Yes. Mine. Oh god what have I done it's 2am.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
ashez2ashes posted:Are there any good co-op zombie apocalypse survivor games?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Are there any good single player games out there? Sometimes I want to solve some puzzle or play out a story, but there's no one around.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 03:13
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:Are there any good single player games out there? Sometimes I want to solve some puzzle or play out a story, but there's no one around. Look into Mage Knight, Final Attack!, Lagoon, Race for the Galaxy (with Gathering Storm), many co-ops (Pandemic / DoW / Forbidden Foo / Flash Point), or wargames (Thunderbolt Apache Leader is my favourite but there are probably hundreds).
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 03:22
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:Are there any good single player games out there? Sometimes I want to solve some puzzle or play out a story, but there's no one around. And, as always, The Lord of the Rings LCG.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
Poison Mushroom posted:I've heard good buzz about Zombie 15 (though it apparently has a monstrous set-up/knockdown time compared to the playtime). Once you know what you're doing, it's not too bad, and sometimes consecutive scenarios use the same map. My larger concern would be replayability.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:Are there any good single player games out there? Sometimes I want to solve some puzzle or play out a story, but there's no one around. Absolutely! Agricola and Mage Knight are the best of the best as far as "solve a puzzle". Each one gives you an almost infinite number of puzzles to solve based on the variable set up and cards. For "Play out a Story" you should check out Tales of the Arabian Night. It's pretty much the best story generator in a board game; it's kind of like a super complex choose your own adventure book. For something less heavy you can check out Pandemic, Forbidden Island, and Forbidden Desert. They are all in the same vein so pick the one with the best theme (or go with Pandemic as it has the most expansions). They are all solid single player "puzzles".
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
I actually own Pandemic, but didn't realize it worked well with a single player. Mage Knight looks really interesting. Could anyone expand a bit upon how it plays? Or, if it's easier, any good video reviews?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
This is a good MK video. https://boardgamegeek.com/video/11547/mage-knight-board-game/walkthrough-1st-turn-solo-game
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:I actually own Pandemic, but didn't realize it worked well with a single player. When I say "single play" pandemic I mean one person playing 4 pawns. One pawn would almost certainly lose. Mage Knight is it's own beast, it really can fall into a million different categories. I have seen people call it a deck builder, area control, resource management, dungeon crawler, etc. I think the best way to describe it is: it's Heroes Of Might and Magic the board game. This video tutorial helped me out when I was learning it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_zW9zDxeYU Rutibex fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Feb 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
ashez2ashes posted:Are there any good co-op zombie apocalypse survivor games? Pandemic - pretend the cubes are zombies
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
A new version of Escape came out called Escape: Zombie City, so if you have any experience with Escape or have at least seen SU&SD's video on it you probably have a feel for how this new game plays. Might be worth a look. It's on sale at Coolstuff til Sunday, too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 04:14
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:Are there any good single player games out there? Sometimes I want to solve some puzzle or play out a story, but there's no one around. Robinson Crusoe is great for roleplaying as a castaway, in addition to feeling like you're slowly starving/freezing/wasting away in the process. The rules are terrible but there's a good illustrated guide on the internet. Legends of Andor is really impressing me. It's a fantasy co-op you can play solo - like most co-ops - by steering multiple characters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
Ghost Stories is the best non-realtime co-op imo. Works fine solo, just play all the monks. I haven't played Legends of Andor though and have heard good things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
Three out of print old-school games (two that are designed as solo games, one that can be played solo) that for one reason or another still hold sweet places in my  areThe Voyage of the BSM Pandora - our 10-30 month mission to seek out new life and - ideally - hit them over the head and drag them back to the ship to get probed. Magic Realm -  Dawn of the Dead - apparently initially easy but ultimately very challenging, you can print and play it. I did a little "watch me play" for Voyage here. The image links don't work any more but almost all of them in roughly the correct order are here: http://imgur.com/a/JsK5c
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
http://www.pcgamer.com/best-board-games/ This poo poo is just weird. "I’ve tried to tailor this list to suit the tastes of most PC gamers—high-quality, deep, systems-driven games that don’t take two hours to unravel and set up." *lists 7 licensed titles, a zombie game and an ipad app*
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
Trynant posted:Re: Argent: The Consortium Thanks for this write-up, I'm seriously considering buying this game now, unless someone can come in and detail some horrible problem with it. I sort of glazed over watching the Watch It Played video but it seemed cool. Which WP games would you compare it to / say are bestest?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:http://www.pcgamer.com/best-board-games/ Recommending both X-wing and Star Trek Attack Wing seems odd. Was the writer really so short on games for his list that he had to include two games that similar? I was browsing through the comments expecting to read people suggesting actual good games, when I came across this gem: quote:I think Settlers of Catan is always implied as the best strategy based board game ever made, so they just never list it anymore. Plus a bunch of random people recommending Munchkin, Axis & Allies and even Warhammer 40K. At least there are a couple of guys recommending good stuff like Eclipse and Dominion. There is hope for this world yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 06:30
|
|
|
Quick takes from tonight: Kemet still owns. We played with three new people and the consensus was that they couldn't wait to play it again now that they had an idea of what they were doing. Epic Spell Wars is pretty boring with 2 players. Channel A is a A2A/CAH type game that is less 2edgy, more conducive to creativity, and generally more entertaining. The rotating producer role picks two premises from a drawn hand of five and then the rest of the table uses their hand of words to invent a show/movie title and deliver a pitch. The winner is determined by voting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 07:13
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:Channel A is a A2A/CAH type game that is less 2edgy, more conducive to creativity, and generally more entertaining. The rotating producer role picks two premises from a drawn hand of five and then the rest of the table uses their hand of words to invent a show/movie title and deliver a pitch. The winner is determined by voting. That actually sounds like a kind of clever party game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 07:21
|
|
|
What's the name of the.... Time traveling Game where the players try to stop a crime, a dm basically, and they figure it out by Failing over And over? Looper? Time loop? That game still getting rave reviews from goons? Replayability high on that one?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 07:32
|
|
|
Tiny Chalupa posted:What's the name of the.... Time traveling Game where the players try to stop a crime, a dm basically, and they figure it out by Failing over And over? Tragedy Looper. My group wasn't really huge fans of it, but we had a rough first game and I didn't do the best job explaining it. It's pretty well-regarded by the rest of the thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
Anyone who is interested in soccer needs to track down Time of Soccer. Despite the slightly dodgy translation job that belie its origins as Spanish, the game itself is an awesome euro team management game. Unlike Blood Bowl Team Manager, the game actually evokes real sport, rather than some arbitrary card nonsense. Great game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 08:25
|
|
|
Big McHuge posted:That actually sounds like a kind of clever party game. It is because it formalizes the part of games like Apples to Apples where people try to (with varying degrees of slyness) sell the judge on their idea and turns it into a core aspect of play. It's not just enough to lay down some cards with words in a clever combination, you have to actually explain what your goofy anime show is about and how it ties into the producer's chosen concepts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 09:10
|
|
|
The End posted:Anyone who is interested in soccer needs to track down Time of Soccer. Despite the slightly dodgy translation job that belie its origins as Spanish, the game itself is an awesome euro team management game. Unlike Blood Bowl Team Manager, the game actually evokes real sport, rather than some arbitrary card nonsense. Great game. Wow, this looks really nice. Can you tell me a bit more about the mechanisms? All the videos I can find are in Spanish.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 09:43
|
|
|
The game runs for ten weeks. Each day, you send your scout around town to recruit players, staff, negotiate sponsors and run press conferences. Come Sunday, you pick your squad in a similar setup to Fifa ultimate team (match up skills, look for synergies) and play your scheduled match (abstracted to dice rolls, modified by your squad strength and formation). You have to balance finances and fatigue. It's super elegant, and I'm very impressed after two plays.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
Tiny Chalupa posted:What's the name of the.... Time traveling Game where the players try to stop a crime, a dm basically, and they figure it out by Failing over And over? This would be Tragedy Looper. Very good game, though it can suffer from the same issue as any co-op game, where one dominant personality decides what happens. Re-playability is good, once you understand that the initial 10 scripts are designed to show you how it can be done, there are rules in the game for designing your own scripts and already a ton of custom ones on BGG. The game is dripping with theme, even more so if you have anime fans at your table who have enjoyed the likes of Higurashi and others, or just mystery fans in general.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 13:57
|
|
|
Tiran Dirth posted:This would be Tragedy Looper. It can't very well suffer from that once you play with restricted communication, as you should. Well, I suppose it can, but then the protagonists will lose because they try to strictly follow one player's plan laid between loops, rather than adapting to what the mastermind is doing during the loop.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 14:10
|
|
|
Scyther posted:It can't very well suffer from that once you play with restricted communication, as you should. Well, I suppose it can, but then the protagonists will lose because they try to strictly follow one player's plan laid between loops, rather than adapting to what the mastermind is doing during the loop. Fair point. Our group felt that no chat during loops takes out too much the social element of gaming, so we came to a compromise that chat during the loop should be limited and open to everyone, (no secret messages or tipping your hand of cards) and protagonists should play within a reasonable time limit to keep some degree of pressure. As the mastermind it is fun to watch the protagonists barking up the wrong tree sometimes too, it adds to that manipulative villain feeling the game creates so well. Alas, one of the minor perils of house rules & agreements to suit your group is you sometimes forget which things are changes from the default.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
Tiny Chalupa posted:What's the name of the.... Time traveling Game where the players try to stop a crime, a dm basically, and they figure it out by Failing over And over? I think the goonsensus was that it's a great game that requires some group buy-in/engagement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:55 |
|
|
Kai Tave posted:It is because it formalizes the part of games like Apples to Apples where people try to (with varying degrees of slyness) sell the judge on their idea and turns it into a core aspect of play. It's not just enough to lay down some cards with words in a clever combination, you have to actually explain what your goofy anime show is about and how it ties into the producer's chosen concepts. Oh, it's for anime. Are there other versions out there? I don't think my group would really go for that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 16:05
|
|