|
Poopy Palpy posted:Last Will is not steampunk, sometimes a top hat is just a top hat. Pretty sure that's the fix sticker for the misprinted progress board
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
Poopy Palpy posted:Last Will is not steampunk, sometimes a top hat is just a top hat. That's the sticker that originally came with the expansion, to mark the original progress board with the Pets step. The combined Progress board that came with the Anniversary edition already has that space marked in Winter, but it's actually in the wrong place - it should be one space to the right of where it is. CGE provides print your own stickers to cover that part of the board and correct it, and also had Vlaada make a rule variant that uses the misprinted timing, which incidentally he says might actually be better anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
Man, Argent does not give a good first impression. Just got my copy and two of the player colors are basically identical to me and the box insert is almost Tash-Kalar bad. It also doesn't really come with enough bags, which is annoying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
Echophonic posted:Man, Argent does not give a good first impression. Just got my copy and two of the player colors are basically identical to me and the box insert is almost Tash-Kalar bad. It also doesn't really come with enough bags, which is annoying. I use this which of course costs another $32 shipped but since I have no plans on ever selling the game I forked over the money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
Yeah, I have some go7gaming inserts, they are fantastic. The removable trays are so convenient. But it's pretty expensive and reserved for basically immortal games for me like Dominion and LotR E: I think I want to make a bitchin' tash kalar insert fozzy fosbourne fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Mar 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:
Noone responded to it (fair enough) but I posted up my own Tash Kalar insert a few days ago.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
Yeah, I noticed that, good job! I think I might experiment with making trays for the pieces though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
I'm giving some serious thought to experimenting with foamcore myself. I have a few games I'd like a better layout for, or where the provided layout doesn't cater for sleeved cards.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Yeah, I noticed that, good job! I think I might experiment with making trays for the pieces though. I had fitted trays for the big board and player boards. I thought about doing it with the decks and chips, where I have one big box, but I couldn't design a way that was both decent looking and expansion proof. I didn't have a lot of room for error. I will happily check out anything you knock up, for inspiration or upgrade!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
It's a lot easier than I thought it would be if you use pins and you don't have larger ambitions than just making various rectangular shapes. Sometimes just putting an asymmetrical cross in the middle of the box is good enough.Jedit posted:I'm giving some serious thought to experimenting with foamcore myself. I have a few games I'd like a better layout for, or where the provided layout doesn't cater for sleeved cards. e: also it's kind of fun
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
quote:I'm giving some serious thought to experimenting with foamcore myself. I have a few games I'd like a better layout for, or where the provided layout doesn't cater for sleeved cards. I had a vague plan of doing up some nice Dominion boxes for quite a while... then I just went and bought the stuff and it ended up taking a single night (including staining/woodburning the boxes). It's really easy stuff to work with and get good results. I find it works really good to mix foamcore with cardboard; you end up with good rigidity, and your interfaces are really easy to do (you slit the foamcore and notch the cardboard). As to wood boxes, all the tools and materials are so much better now than I remember from wood shop.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
jmzero posted:I had a vague plan of doing up some nice Dominion boxes for quite a while... then I just went and bought the stuff and it ended up taking a single night (including staining/woodburning the boxes). It's really easy stuff to work with and get good results. I find it works really good to mix foamcore with cardboard; you end up with good rigidity, and your interfaces are really easy to do (you slit the foamcore and notch the cardboard). As to wood boxes, all the tools and materials are so much better now than I remember from wood shop. Yeah, anything a school could afford was crap to begin with, and years and years of kids abusing the tools did not make for a good experience. Tash-Kalar is a pretty good game for plastic baggies though, mine fit each deck with tokens perfectly. Mage Knight on the other hand really needs a better solution that is also expansionproof.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Need some buying advice. Going on a cabin trip this weekend with 5-6 other guys I've known all my life, good food, beer and boardgames. I'm bringin a couple of games: Sheriff of Nottingham (Played this a bunch, love it but max. 5 players) Skull (Great, especially when drunk) Love Letter (I can fit this in my pocket so why not?) King of New York (Should be good, plays up to 6 but how well?) Avalon (Never played it but I think it'll be a hit in this group) Ticket to Ride (Classic, everyone knows it but max. 5 players) My question is, should I get 7 wonders or will I be more than happy with my current games?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
snuff posted:Need some buying advice. Get 7 Wonders regardless. It's a great game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
snuff posted:Need some buying advice. Not getting 7 Wonders is a mistake always. Skip the expansions though. I don't know about your group, but I know I'd be wanting something slightly heavier at some point, maybe Agricola or BSG or Power Grid or something, depending on your tastes?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, PRINT CHEAT SHEETS WITH EXPLANATIONS OF WHAT ALL OF THE drat SYMBOLS DO FOR 7 WONDERS My most excruciating experience in board games was trying to teach 7 Wonders to 6 newbs with just the one book. Then, I got brow beaten into doing it all over again with newbs with the expansions. Both times it was with players who expect to have a shot at winning the first game they play even if they didn't know the rules beforehand. I think it took like 30 minutes to draft the leaders and there were people furious that they didn't know what their third wonder stage did by the time they got to the 3rd age etc. It was my bad for not printing cheat sheets, but god drat did it make me appreciate the cool, comforting bosom of Dominion afterwards and their fortuitous decision to ACTUALLY EXPLAIN WHAT THE loving CARDS DO ON THE CARDS /boardshames
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
As an addendum, don't play seven player games of 7 Wonders because it's poo poo with that many people anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, PRINT CHEAT SHEETS WITH EXPLANATIONS OF WHAT ALL OF THE drat SYMBOLS DO FOR 7 WONDERS Great advice, thanks all. Guess I'm getting 7 Wonders 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:As an addendum, don't play seven player games of 7 Wonders because it's poo poo with that many people anyway. The only lovely 7 player experience I had was when there were two newcomers to the game and I was the only one that would help them figure it out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, PRINT CHEAT SHEETS WITH EXPLANATIONS OF WHAT ALL OF THE drat SYMBOLS DO FOR 7 WONDERS In our group, 7 wonders usually goes like this "Someone hand me the rulebook." "What's the symbol?" "You just want to ruin my plan. gently caress you, hand me the rule book." Alternate names for the game include "Why the gently caress did you pass me these cards?", "Holy poo poo, I can't believe you let me have this card." and, "Oh, gently caress YOU.", with an occasional appearance by "Oh, it's going to be THAT kind of game."
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
I think I need 7Wonders. My group gets together to do MTG drafts simply because drafting rules. Anyway, what are people's thoughts on Trains, specifically Trains Rising Sun?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:As an addendum, don't play FTFY
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
ChiTownEddie posted:Anyway, what are people's thoughts on Trains, specifically Trains Rising Sun? If the thing holding you back from playing Dominion is that it doesn't have a pointless board or that the theme isn't boring enough, I guess it's the game for you. I'd recommend Dominion anyway, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:As an addendum, don't play seven player games of 7 Wonders because it's poo poo with that many people anyway. Eh, it loses the ability to see the same hand again, but 7 wonders is one of the few non-party games I'll play with 7 people because simultaneous play means that the overall play time isn't that much longer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
ChiTownEddie posted:I think I need 7Wonders. My group gets together to do MTG drafts simply because drafting rules. I was thoroughly unimpressed with Trains, mostly because dominion is just better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Sloober posted:The only lovely 7 player experience I had was when there were two newcomers to the game and I was the only one that would help them figure it out. snuff posted:Need some buying advice. King of Tokyo with more than four always seems to end up with one gal being eliminated an hour before the game ends, at least in my experience. I don't know if KoNY fixes that. Edit: I would also consider Formula D for this sort of setting. Not as mechanically tight or satisfying, but more likely to engender a social atmosphere instead of "six people pouring over their math homework" like 7 Wonders can. Or if you need filler that takes less than an hour, I guess Masquerade might be better, and might actually get played outside of cabin trips. PerniciousKnid fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Mar 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:I was thoroughly unimpressed with Trains, mostly because dominion is just better. Try before buy it is. That said I am one of those weirdos that...likes to acknowledge how good Dominion is...from afar. I don't need to play it anymore.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
Noaloha posted:Reading through the BGG thread you mentioned, it's looking increasingly likely that any issues of print quality with Dominion is due to their production being based out of Hasbro now. I have all the expansions to date except Guilds and Cornucopia. I was planning on completing my set eventually. I no longer plan to do so.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
ChiTownEddie posted:Try before buy it is. If you don't need to play Dominion any more, you definitely don't need to play Trains.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:I have all the expansions to date except Guilds and Cornucopia. Heh, see I would probably be buying them up on geekmarket or something right now if I didn't already have them. But I am a broken person
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:I was thoroughly unimpressed with Trains, mostly because dominion is just better. I'm going to try to not open a huge can of worms here, but could you elaborate on what about Dominion is "just better"? Are the cards in the market better designed (I know of the extensive testing that went into Dominion), or the single action turns, or something else? Not being sarcastic or snarky, I'm just genuinely curious what your (or anyone else's) thoughts are, since in my experience the two are all but interchangeable quality-wise.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
Basically, yes, it's the one-action thing. Trains removes that, which means there's basically no challenge to how to run your turns. It also adds a bunch of extra junk to the deck which makes every game like a big-attack game (sloggy, dull) and whilst the board could have been interesting, what it really winds up being is just a way to buy VP cards.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Poopy Palpy posted:If the thing holding you back from playing Dominion is that it doesn't have a pointless board or that the theme isn't boring enough, I guess it's the game for you. I'd recommend Dominion anyway, though. If you're one of the people who feel like Dominion is a mechanic that someone forgot to add a game to, the board actually does a lot of of good. I would much rather play Trains than Dominion because the board makes it feel like a proper game and not just a mechanic. I have not played Trains enough to say whether you can actually ignore the board totally. Also, the trash mechanic is basically the same as shuffling victory points into the deck, except it can be interacted with in more interesting ways.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
Which more interesting ways?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Which more interesting ways? You can build your engine around trashing it, you can have cards that lets you discard/trash waste for various effects and you can try to avoid getting it in the first place. I'm not even saying that Trains is that good of a game (though I found it enjoyable), I'm just saying that it actually feels like a game, unlike Dominion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
You can do all that stuff in dominion as well, so... Put it this way: there's little more satisfying than owning someone so hard in Dominion that your best way to win is to use Ambassador to give them a Colony in order to empty the colony pile, and still win. Trains is basically just Dominion with the 'one action per turn' art taken out, and some of the VP cards give you junk as well, and it has dramatically fewer cards than even the base set did IIRC. All of the things you can do with pollution in trains, you can do with trashers in dominion, only better. The main reason it's a better game, is because it was playtested a tonne more. I feel safe in saying that despite not knowing how trains was playtested, because it was designed and published after Dominion, and there hasn't been enough time since dominion was published for it to have been playtested as much as dominion is claimed to have been. I'll never understand this idea that dominion is somehow not a game because it has weak theme. Is chess somehow not a game because it has weak theme? What about draughts/checkers? Go? Every single game using a normal 52-card deck of playing cards? it's not like there's any loving theme at all to poker.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
Chess and Go are war themed... 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
Someone once tried to explain to me that he couldn't get into Dominion because its theme was weak... in the middle of a game of Hansa Teutonica. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Chess and Go are war themed... No more so than dominion is owning/developing land in the middle ages themed. E: and chess? War themed? How many wars do you know about where the king and queen line up together with 8 pawns in front of them, two bishops on either side of them, and mobile castles? Huh? How many 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:You can do all that stuff in dominion as well, so... For me at least, its not that it has a weak or absent theme, its that it feels really...like a tech demo. It doesn't even have the trappings of a full game around it. I know, neither does poker, but I don't enjoy poker either. It's a game in the way that rock paper scissors feels like a game. It also just really feels like multiplayer solitaire in a way I dont like, and there's a nagging feeling that there's a mathematically correct solution to every tableau and the game is just about who sees it first.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 23:07
|
|