|
I'm blown away at what pedantic, elitist assholes many of your are being regarding Trains v Dominions. Trains is a perfectly serviceable deck builder, it isn't some dumbed down game for idiots. This isn't like Arkham Horror or Munchkin, where we can all dogpile an objectively bad game. Trains may not be your platonic deck building ideal, but it is an extremely approachable and engaging deck builder. Rising Sun only makes it better (as an expansion, I can't recommend it as a standalone purchase) with the inclusion of route cards and the excellently designed two player maps.
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:44 |
|
|
cyberia posted:Does anyone have any thoughts on Warmachine High Command? FWIW, I enjoy playing Star Realms and Core Worlds so my opinions on games may not be totally in line with the majority of the thread. Bearing in mind I'm just speaking about the base game here, and I've only ever played it two player: It's thoroughly okay. It's definitely a different take on the deckbuilder. I certainly like a lot of the ideas in it. I like the concept of picking my starting market before the game plays, I like how you've got a set of one shot nukes to plan around, I like how every card doubles as money so there's a tension of card as value versus card as power play, and the concept of banking cards is a great one to play with. Unfortunately, it's a two-economy deckbuilder with a single deck constantly replenishing market row, and the fact that you don't share it with your opponents doesn't save that concept in the least. Basically, if Ascension's core mechanic bothers you in the least, abort. On top of that, the base game is all out of whack. Contesting locations is laughable: you don't earn them, you decide to give them up and let your opponent have it, and then they do the same for you. Maybe that's intended, but it doesn't feel like I'm winning locations due to my own skill and outplaying my opponent, I'm winning locations because my opponent doesn't have the resources to stop me profitably because I let him have a place last turn. On top of that, it's entirely feasible to completely ignore card abilities and buy just based on VP value, and there aren't enough turns in the game to have critical ones be thrown off by a draw from the Winds of War deck. If you really like the theme, great. If someone comes in and explains how an expansion fixes these issues, great. However, based on my own experiences, you could probably do better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
High Command is alright but you absolutely must buy the Castle of the Keys(Hordes) / Invasion of Sul(Warmachine) expansions to replace the default location and winds of war cards because the ones in the base game are garbage that leads to the above scenario. After that it's alright, but considering the deck construction nature of the game you won't really get much out of it unless you're playing against other people who know how to construct good decks and know what they're doing. If you don't have that kind of a regular play group, I wouldn't bother.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
I didn't sell Trains because it's not pure enough or something. I sold it because nobody liked playing it. I wanted to like it, it just doesn't work very well. We mostly gravitated towards the same basic strategy immediately - essentially big money, and only using your starter trains/stations. A few people tried to go more heavy on the board and never really did well. They still needed to money up, and they just couldn't keep up with people buying VP directly. Beyond that there were very few real decision points, as there wasn't enough deck building mechanics to support them (no action limit, etc..) and overall the cards are super bland. Maybe it works better for some groups, but I remember hearing similar experiences from other groups when it was a new game. Overall I'd rather play DC Deckbuilder. Anyway, if you like Trains, cool, but you'd probably change more minds if your post had content other than "it's engaging", " it's well designed" and "you're all jerks".
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
As entertaining as realizing I opened a  was...thanks jmzero, that was a bit closer to what I was looking for.I also checked out Star Realms since it had a free base app, man...I really don't need to spend money on that either. Alas.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
jmzero posted:I didn't sell Trains because it's not pure enough or something. I sold it because nobody liked playing it. I wanted to like it, it just doesn't work very well. I actually like Dominions more, I'm just trying to point out that Trains gets smeared more than it deserves due to Dominion having some of the most obnoxious fans in board gaming.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
Vlaada Chvatil posted:a perfectly serviceable deck builder This is damning with such faint praise I'm going to use it whenever I want to criticise a deckbuilder now. For instance: ChiTownEddie posted:I also checked out Star Realms since it had a free base app, man...I really don't need to spend money on that either. Alas. Star Realms is a perfectly serviceable deck builder.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
Vlaada Chvatil posted:I actually like Dominions more, I'm just trying to point out that Trains gets smeared more than it deserves due to Dominion having some of the most obnoxious fans in board gaming. Nothing that has fans has fans who aren't annoying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:59
|
|
|
I don't know if I would go so far as to call Star Realms serviceable 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 06:44
|
|
|
jmzero posted:I didn't sell Trains because it's not pure enough or something. I sold it because nobody liked playing it. I wanted to like it, it just doesn't work very well. I kind of agree with you, especially that the starter set up is "make dominion". Rising Sun adds a lot more board oriented cards so you can make a setup with fewer of the card-draw cards that turn it into "base set dominion". Trains' greatest flaw was not being confident enough to ditch the basic dominion style. But that's a problem players can fix with the card setup.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 08:01
|
|
|
PlaneGuy posted:Trains' greatest flaw was not being confident enough to ditch the basic dominion style. But that's a problem players can fix with the card setup. Trains' biggest flaw is unlimited actions/buys.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 08:03
|
|
|
Speaking of games that use cards, sometimes in decks: Tuesday boardgame night trip report was Summoner Wars, Summoner Wars, and more Summoner Wars. Three games with two new players that I brought up to speed, I won one and lost the other two (lost to the same player no less, so gg to you dude with the hat whose name I don't remember). I decided to go all in on the master set and hey, that play board is pretty swanky. Two games I played were with the same Tundra Orcs vs. Phoenix Elves quickstart set, then I got to play one game with the master set. I was Benders while the dude with the hat was Shadow Elves and holy poo poo Shadow Elves are a pain in the rear end. Me, at some point during the game: "How many loving Scouts do you have in there?" I literally couldn't mind control them fast enough and some nasty early damage kept my Summoner on the run. Also I wound up decking out while he still had like three turns of drawing left or something ridiculous. On the other hand, Sand Goblins look fun as hell. I may be thinking about trying some 4-player Summoner Wars, does anyone with prior experience have anything to say on the subject yea or nay? Things wound down pretty quickly this evening, I guess people were tired this week, so near the end it was me and Trent the store owner, who pulled out Niya, a charming two-player game like Connect Four but with a deeper strategy since in addition to trying to get four of your tiles in a row (or in a 2x2 square here), the spaces you lay them down on each have different pictorial symbols on them, two apiece, and whichever symbols are on the space you choose your opponent has to lay his next piece on a space that has one of them. So if I choose a space that has both maple leaves and the sun then when he goes to play his next tile he has to place it on a space that has either maple leaves or the sun, and that in turn influences where I can place my next one and so on. You win by either getting the aforementioned four-in-a-row or 2x2 or by arranging it so your opponent has no valid placements on their turn. A nice, peaceful way to wind the evening down. After last week's very fun venture with Avalon I went ahead and bought Coup though I didn't get a chance to play this evening, maybe next week. Except next week I may also bring the X-Wing starter set I bought several months back and try to get some of that going, especially since Trent just got the new expansion in plus restocks of old stuff. And I still want to get some Kemet going again, plus I still have to get some more out of that Risk: Legacy I bought.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 09:16
|
|
|
jmzero posted:Anyway, if you like Trains, cool, but you'd probably change more minds if your post had content other than "it's engaging", " it's well designed" and "you're all jerks". I don't think the pro-Trains side was actually arguing for Trains being a masterwork (I know I wasn't), but more against Dominion feeling interesting. Dominion is objectively better balanced and smoother playing and more tactical and whatever. But it just doesn't feel like a full game to me. That is entirely subjective, and I don't really expect y'all to agree or anything. To me, Dominion is like symphonic music: I appreciate the interplay between the instruments, the composition, the skill of the musicians and so on, it just fails to evoke any feelings other than "what's the point of all this". I realize that I sound like Tom Vassel saying "it's just not fun", but that's how I feel. Trains is like symphonic black metal (because gently caress if I can think of any other symphonicy stuff that's actually half good) in this analogy: It removes all the intricacies of composition, adds retarded flavour (trains and "hail Satan" are equally stupid, yes), but at least now I feel like headbanging, even though I realize that it is technically inferior music. Some of the design choices may still be stupid (unlimited buy actions/vocals that sound like barfing), but it's still more enjoyable to go to a black metal concert than a symphony, at least to me. Regarding board state in Dominion: The only thing you can actually read is that some piles are more empty than others, not who emptied them or how the decks look. Possibly, adding little tokens for each card that everyone would display in front of them would be enough to satisfy my need for a readable board state. But that really is what it comes down to: I want some semblance of a visual of how people are doing, even if it's likely to be completely changed five times each round (Dominant Species is like that I believe).
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 09:19
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:What is the theme of Go? Autism simulator? War, as I mentioned in my post right above that one? Unless you also post in the go thread and are being ironic, of course.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 09:46
|
|
|
quote:Regarding board state in Dominion: The only thing you can actually read is that some piles are more empty than others, not who emptied them or how the decks look. Possibly, adding little tokens for each card that everyone would display in front of them would be enough to satisfy my need for a readable board state. But that really is what it comes down to: I want some semblance of a visual of how people are doing, even if it's likely to be completely changed five times each round (Dominant Species is like that I believe). Yeah - I should have been clearer about who/what I was replying to (ie. not you). I certainly think Dominion could have used a theme, and I can see favoring a game that has a theme. Hell, I play Sentinels sometimes (and it's pretty terrible). And I agree with your point on board state and positional clarity (though I don't know how I'd work it in effectively to Dominion). I was more responding to what I interpreted as something like "you have to be an elitist to not like Trains" (which I don't think is what that post was intended to say either, but that's what I was responding to). I will say, though, that there's a reason I (and many people) tend to really crap on games that are "serviceable". If I watch an OK movie, I usually feel like I got reasonable value out of it. When we started, we got value out of our "OK" board games too - we'd give anything some play just for the novelty, and most everything we tried had some new element. Now, we have so many games we like, that if something doesn't really sell itself in the first few plays, it's done and gone. An "OK" game often feels like an overall "negative value for money", especially if it's unambitious. I don't really mind a bad game that tries something odd (eg. Room 25), but I really feel burnt when I get a generally decent game that feels like a worse version of something we already have (eg. Trains or Tiny Epic Kingdoms). That disappointment comes through in much sharper criticism than a game might deserve based on its objective merits. Trains is not a terrible game, but we all ended up sort of angry at it by the time we sold it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 09:48
|
|
|
Trasson posted:Bearing in mind I'm just speaking about the base game here, and I've only ever played it two player: I think I've posted pretty similar feelings about the game; I feel like it's not so much a game of war but a game of who can buy the most VPs from their market, so it's pretty much solitaire; it requires too much investment in the game's two resources to deploy to do war - two resources just doesn't feel necessary either since there really isn't much difference between what you buy with them, and the numbers are so low that they really should have just had one resource. Many turns devolve into "Well I can't really do anything with this hand" or "I can't afford to buy anything" because the mixture was crap. I don't quite know what you could do to fix the game beyond making all the cards cheaper buys and eliminating or at least severely cutting down on the VPs available in the market, though. It's definitely too easy to stop someone from taking a land so it does come down to letting them take it more than aggressively seeking it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 14:01
|
|
|
So Time of Soccer is going to cost 40 euros, which is reasonable. But shipping to the UK is 25 euros, turning it into a £47 gamble. Ouch. On the off chance that anyone else in the UK is interested in also getting a copy and sharing the shipping cost, I'm probably going to take the plunge here for the sake of theme and 2hr+ games of Football Manager: The Board Game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 14:19
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:So Time of Soccer is going to cost 40 euros, which is reasonable. But shipping to the UK is 25 euros, turning it into a £47 gamble. Ouch. 25 Euros to ship from Spain to UK? What the gently caress? We paid AUD$25 from Spain to Australia (Like 17 euros). Crazy. UK Goons - if you want a football boardgame, this is a legitimately good game. Help Fat Turkey out, because that freight is extortionate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
What? They charged you only 17 euros to send to Australia? And are charging more for the UK? That sounds really off. Is this directly from Elite Games because that is where I'm getting the quote from. That said, 17 euros to Aus sounds cheap. His big is the package?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 15:25
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:What? They charged you only 17 euros to send to Australia? And are charging more for the UK? That sounds really off. Is this directly from Elite Games because that is where I'm getting the quote from. Honest truth, directly from the publisher. The box is ever so slightly bigger than a Fantasy Flight box. The only thing I can think of is that you must be paying extra tax/duties, because there is no sane reason it should be dearer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
Ah yeah. I think the difference is VAT, which is our equivalent of Sales Tax. I would have to pay that as an EU country whereas you wouldn't, the flip side bring you might have to pay import tax, whereas I wouldn't. I've been looking around and 25 euro seems to be a fair price for couriering a parcel from Spain to England so I guess I just have to suck it up. Look how much faith I'm putting into a single internet review! That said I have read through the rules and watched some Spanish YouTube on the game, and the sheer curiousity and my friends interest in the theme is enough to seal it I think. If I like it enough I would try the first UK review of it :o
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
I got AquaSphere last week and really like it. After three plays I can safely say I kind of suck at planning very far ahead, but I still really like how the game forces your to really optimize your 5 or so actions per round. My biggest complaint is just how busy the board gets after a few turns, like I wish my scientist was just a little taller to stand out among the robots better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
This is from a little while ago but I used to not see any connection at all between Chess and military stuff. Later I realized that chess teaches quite a lot, just not the stuff I was expecting. Military lessons chess teaches: * Every unit has its own job/strengths, there are no good at everything all purpose units in an army * Positioning (and therefore terrain) is super important * Anything can get totally owned even by the lowliest unit if left vulnerable/unsupported * It's not so much about killing other units, it's about forcing your opponent's position and moves
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:This is from a little while ago but I used to not see any connection at all between Chess and military stuff. A slight tangent, but I love this review of Chess on BGG which is a hilarious parody of BGG-style board game reviews.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:A slight tangent, but I love this review of Chess on BGG which is a hilarious parody of BGG-style board game reviews. This is the best reply to the review: BGG Commenter posted:I hope you've got the latest errata, dated 1483. They added a special pawn move that improves play.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
That was a fun read 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:War, as I mentioned in my post right above that one? Does Go really have a war theme? I know people say it resembles war strategy, but it doesn't even have army pieces, just stones and a grid. The theme is really something externally applied to it. If Go does have a theme, that theme is topography.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
Just to bring this full-circle, there exists a Chess Deckbuilder. I like it quite a bit, it's got some challenging resource management. Still no wooden cubes, though, the one thing chess is really missing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
Trasson posted:Bearing in mind I'm just speaking about the base game here, and I've only ever played it two player: S.J. posted:High Command is alright but you absolutely must buy the Castle of the Keys(Hordes) / Invasion of Sul(Warmachine) expansions to replace the default location and winds of war cards because the ones in the base game are garbage that leads to the above scenario. After that it's alright, but considering the deck construction nature of the game you won't really get much out of it unless you're playing against other people who know how to construct good decks and know what they're doing. If you don't have that kind of a regular play group, I wouldn't bother. Thanks for the feedback. Unfortunately I don't have anyone to regularly play against so I guess I'll pass on it for now. edit: Sloober posted:I think I've posted pretty similar feelings about the game; I feel like it's not so much a game of war but a game of who can buy the most VPs from their market, so it's pretty much solitaire; it requires too much investment in the game's two resources to deploy to do war - two resources just doesn't feel necessary either since there really isn't much difference between what you buy with them, and the numbers are so low that they really should have just had one resource. Many turns devolve into "Well I can't really do anything with this hand" or "I can't afford to buy anything" because the mixture was crap. I don't quite know what you could do to fix the game beyond making all the cards cheaper buys and eliminating or at least severely cutting down on the VPs available in the market, though. It's definitely too easy to stop someone from taking a land so it does come down to letting them take it more than aggressively seeking it. I feel this way when I play Core Worlds. I often wonder if I'm missing some fundamental rule or if I'm just bad at the game (or if the game is bad) because it seems like the cost of buying the planets, especially in the later rounds, is so high as to be unobtainable. Most games I play start off with reasonable actions in the first few rounds then end with both players not really being able to do anything in the last 2-3 rounds. Maybe I should invest in the Core Worlds expansion packs rather than getting another half-baked deckbuilder to add to my collection. Or I should just buy Dominion and give up on my dreams of playing a well-designed sci-fi deckbuilder
cyberia fucked around with this message at 00:30 on Mar 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Have you tried Eminent Domain? I'm going to get that and its expansion eventually and I think it's well regarded here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Have you tried Eminent Domain? I'm going to get that and its expansion eventually and I think it's well regarded here. Doit. EmDo with expansion gets way way better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Review of the expansion from Joel Eddy: http://drivethruvideos.com/eminent-domain-escalation-review/ E: O.G. review http://drivethruvideos.com/eminent-domain-review/ In short, it's one of his favorite games of all time fozzy fosbourne fucked around with this message at 00:46 on Mar 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Echophonic posted:Just to bring this full-circle, there exists a Chess Deckbuilder. I like it quite a bit, it's got some challenging resource management.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Does Go really have a war theme? I know people say it resembles war strategy, but it doesn't even have army pieces, just stones and a grid. The theme is really something externally applied to it. Again, theme and setting are not the same. Go is a pure abstract, it has no setting, just like Zertz, Othello, whatever. But the theme is there, tactically and strategically. Players refer to moves as "running away", "retreat", "attack", "invade", and so on. Those are warlike. Madmarker posted:This is the best reply to the review: Sphere, that commenter, is one of the most prolific Napoleon's Triumph commenters (and playtesters)  vvvvvvvvvvv I guess that's a better way of putting it. silvergoose fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Mar 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
Sphere, the commenter on BGG, utterly owns bones.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 01:22
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Have you tried Eminent Domain? I'm going to get that and its expansion eventually and I think it's well regarded here. I'm selling my copy which includes the expansion! It's just not for me. I like Core Worlds and its expansion a lot better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
Poison Mushroom posted:Oh my God, this is amazing. No lie, it's seriously one of the most brain-burning games in my collection. You have to strike this balance of running your engine to get buys, cards, and actions and knowing when to thin your deck and put pieces on the board. Do you keep that rook and get your 3 gold to buy with or do you put it on the board and pressure your opponent into thinning for pieces, too? If you like Dominion and even kind of like chess, it's worth checking out. Also none of this checkmate or 'no more Provinces' poo poo, it's kill or be killed and you actually have to capture their king. I finally got my copy of Dungeon Lords Anniversary and holy poo poo is this nice. I have one of the old combat boards, so I put my info into the form and hopefully they'll get me sorted out. I did have a question, though. What is this pet phase sticker for? Is it for the 'simple' board? Echophonic fucked around with this message at 01:46 on Mar 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
Lorini posted:I'm selling my copy which includes the expansion! It's just not for me. I like Core Worlds and its expansion a lot better. I know they are pretty different, but care to compare and contrast? I know the criticism of Core Worlds is the shared random market row thing. I'm not totally against that since it seems not that dissimilar to shared deck card games and I play and enjoy a bunch of those, but those usually benefit from being able to be played really quickly so you can brute force out the randomness over many plays. Not sure about that with Core Worlds. Then again, I've read elsewhere that Core Worlds has a bit more tactical playing of cards from your hand than the average deck builder (which are usually focused purchasing cards and then vomiting your whole hand onto the table every time your turn comes up). And that sounds appealing. I've also read both games described as someone's favorite game in a few different places, so .. yeah. Also, have you played more Argent? How is it holding up?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Keyflower gets a lot of praise here so I decided to check it out and now I am going to make it mine. Anything I should be aware of and how vital are the expansions?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:44 |
|
|
bakka bakka posted:Keyflower gets a lot of praise here so I decided to check it out and now I am going to make it mine. Anything I should be aware of and how vital are the expansions? The game's pretty strong on its own. I haven't gotten it to the table lately, but the expansions really just seem like variety and a few new mechanics, so not really essential.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2015 02:50
|
|