|
I'm just gonna throw out that personally I think Dominant Species is a poo poo game. The main reason I dislike it is the same reason I hate Suburbia: it's a game that gets lost in micro-tracking hell because every single loving move changes established values on the board. Every individual tile is dominated or whatever by one player but every single time someone adds an affinity to their board, or depletes or resource, or adds a resource you have to re-evaluate a bunch of tiles. It's just like how in Suburbia every time you add a green tile or a blue tile or whatever every single player has to count up to see how much money they make and half the tiles on the board now have their values adjusted and you have to this multiple times a turn for no reason. Even compared to games like Twilight Imperium is a stupid amount of unnecessary tracking. At least in TI if you someone claims a planet or whatever all you have to think is "ok that guy has a couple more resources now". Not "ok we have to recalculate the mineral richness of the quadrant and see which species is now leading on the productiveness chart which also changes 20 seconds later when someone depletes an ore mine because the Yssaril changes from level 2 tritanium affinity to 3 tritanium affinity last turn so that means they dominate the resource extraction of this sector which by the way is totally different from military domination." Also whoever wrote the rulebook is just a loving rear end in a top hat. TLDR: Dominant Species sucks unless you love recalculation and busy work more than an EVE Online player and the rulebook is poo poo even compared to Fantasy Flight products.
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:12 |
|
|
FingersMaloy posted:My friends and I love Coup but I don't love the SciFi art. Got the French version plus expansion sent from Canada. Where did you order this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Han Yolo posted:Where did you order this? http://www.boardgamebliss.com
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:I'm just gonna throw out that personally I think Dominant Species is a poo poo game. Remember, "is a poo poo game" and "I don't personally enjoy game" are very different things. Not actually a bad writeup! Just your starting sentence is unnecessarily combative.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:I'm just gonna throw out that personally I think Dominant Species is a poo poo game. I respect your opinion on this, but the rule book? What's your issue there? It's one of the better written rule books I've read. Before playing, I did one reading, front to back, and understood the game well enough to teach. Sir Reginald, I disagree.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
FingersMaloy posted:My friends and I love Coup but I don't love the SciFi art. Got the French version plus expansion sent from Canada. I know there's a natural tendency to scoff at licensed games, but the first time I played Coup I immediately though it would have been a perfect Game of Thrones game. Players hold influence over characters on the council, lie to each other, back stab and try to eliminate competition to be the last one standing? It's almost too perfect, really.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
FingersMaloy posted:My friends and I love Coup but I don't love the SciFi art. Got the French version plus expansion sent from Canada. I got the Brazilian version due to this reason. However I am super tempted to do a print and play of some of the amazing Dune artwork version, especially you can use little blue marbles as the currency tokens and call them spice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
I think virtually any theme would be better than the one we got here in murica
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
The Brazilian version is sick but I couldn't find anyone that would ship to the U.S. I love the action hints on the bottom of the cards. I'm gonna have my wife photoshop the player aid card for English actions and have new ones printed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:I respect your opinion on this, but the rule book? What's your issue there? It's one of the better written rule books I've read. Before playing, I did one reading, front to back, and understood the game well enough to teach. I'll just cite a specific case because I was the learner of this game and not a teacher. I haven't actually read the manual and that's why I didn't press the rules aspect in my post. It's possible my friend is just a lovely teacher and the rules are ok. Here is the scenario that sent me over the edge about this game the last time I tried to play it... I was playing the spiders. The spider's sheet says that they get one AP on the action that kills another player's species (competition I think?). On the main board it says that an AP on competition means you can kill one species in each of the three different tiles (tundra plus the two determined by the AP placement). Except when I executed this ability I'm suddenly told by the host that actually the spider's power is a lesser version and only kills one species in one tile. He had to show me where it said this in the rulebook because I didn't believe it at first. My beef with this is that if that's the case and spider's power is a lesser version of the AP then why the gently caress doesn't the spider's sheet or main board say that anywhere? Why in world would you hide info about a faction's ability deep in the rulebook and not on their god drat sheet? That isn't the only example of rules fuckery but it's the clearest that I can remember (it's been a bit). And don't even get me started on "dominance" vs "domination". In any case even if the rules were immaculately laid out I would still hate the game because of all the micromanagement and tedious recalculation bullshit. It just doesn't work for me at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:I was playing the spiders. The spider's sheet says that they get one AP on the action that kills another player's species (competition I think?). On the main board it says that an AP on competition means you can kill one species in each of the three different tiles (tundra plus the two determined by the AP placement). Except when I executed this ability I'm suddenly told by the host that actually the spider's power is a lesser version and only kills one species in one tile. Your friend is a lovely teacher if he didn't make that clear to you. It is not a lesser version though. You get to kill one species before anyone, no matter the turn order you're in, so it is a great defensive tool.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
jmzero posted:I don't remember what prompted the anti-Magic rants, but I think the case against has been overstated pretty hard. Magic was an incredible design when it came out, and remains a strong one. I don't feel like a huge effort-post, but at very least: I think I caused it with talking about how I separate out chunks of land when I shuffle 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
As a counter point for Dominant Species, I feel it is an elegant, aggressive worker placement where every action matters. The calculations may change the board state on a frequent basis, but the calculations are easy (basic multiplication). This may be too much for many people though, and it is not a light game. My big refute is the rule book. It is one of the best written rule books I've had the pleasure of reading. It starts with a glossary (something every technical manual should have at the front) game set up, an in depth explanation of dominance (basic multiplication), and an overview of the action board (where you place your workers/APs). From there it explains the sequence of play, and goes immediately to the explanation of the actions available. There's an explanation of the cards at the back and a rules summary with the end game conditions (again) on the back cover. Honestly, I think it's a great rule book. However, I respect Chomp and his feelings towards it. I only offer this as a dissenting opinion. Play the game, maybe you'll hate it, maybe you'll love it. E: after reading your response, I will say this: the spider ability is printed right on the board. It allows you do perform competition in any one type of terrain. Other competition actions allow you to compete in only the specified terrains. Yes it's two, but it's limited. Dr. Lunchables fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Apr 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
nimby posted:Your friend is a lovely teacher if he didn't make that clear to you. Yeah he probably is a lovely teacher but you don't think that kind of stuff should be on the faction sheet? I think it's pretty bad design for a faction specific ability not to be detailed properly on that faction's sheet and hidden away in the manual instead. If it only kills one species but goes first then it should say both of things on the spider sheet. But no, all it says is "one free AP on competition". What the hell man?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
Chad Jensen writes the best rulebooks in the biz.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
poo poo, I knew I shouldn't have edited. Anyway, everything always proceeds left to right. The spider ability is farthest left, indicating it goes first. All of your complaints about faction specific abilities are clearly printed on the game board. I think a read through of the rules would have done you worlds of good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:poo poo, I knew I shouldn't have edited. Anyway, everything always proceeds left to right. The spider ability is farthest left, indicating it goes first. Gonna have to quote myself I guess. Chomp8645 posted:In any case even if the rules were immaculately laid out I would still hate the game because of all the micromanagement and tedious recalculation bullshit. It just doesn't work for me at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Oh, I'm there with you. It's not a game for you. My sticking point is that the rules kick rear end, and they're amazingly well written. Let's just smoke a blunt and call it a day.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:Yeah he probably is a lovely teacher but you don't think that kind of stuff should be on the faction sheet? I think it's pretty bad design for a faction specific ability not to be detailed properly on that faction's sheet and hidden away in the manual instead. Re: your earlier point about bookkeeping, I don't think it's that bad. You only actually care about domination for one action and it's easy to calculate. If you keep up with it during the round it makes it a bit clearer how things stand but it's not super critical.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:13
|
|
God I fucking love Diablo 3 gold, it even paid for this shitty title
|
FingersMaloy posted:The Brazilian version is sick but I couldn't find anyone that would ship to the U.S. I love the action hints on the bottom of the cards. Look on ebay. I got the entire Brazilian kickstarter version with sweet but useless coup artwork swag for like $25.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
Using 'Dominance' and 'Domination' as terms of art to refer to similar, but very distinct, game concepts was a dick move on the part of the rules writers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
Tendales posted:Using 'Dominance' and 'Domination' as terms of art to refer to similar, but very distinct, game concepts was a dick move on the part of the rules writers. I didn't want to get into this too much because my main complaint with the game is the mechanics themselves rather than the way their documented. But yeah, what the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
I've only played Dominant Species once and while overall I enjoyed it I think an electronic version of the game would work a lot better because only realizing during final scoring that we forgot to update dominance on a couple tiles no one was really scoring throughout the game was not a fun experience
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
iOS version of Dominant Species ought to be coming out in the next few months according to GMT, so the bookkeeping will be removed from the players hands entirely. I believe it's Playdek, so make of that what you will. Re: dominancination, yeah I'm not a fan either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:iOS version of Dominant Species ought to be coming out in the next few months according to GMT, so the bookkeeping will be removed from the players hands entirely. I believe it's Playdek, so make of that what you will. There's already an iOS version of Dominant Species.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:iOS version of Dominant Species ought to be coming out in the next few months according to GMT, so the bookkeeping will be removed from the players hands entirely. I believe it's Playdek, so make of that what you will. You've mixed up Dominant Species with Twilight Struggle. DS is already out, but the UI got panned and they're revamping it with a new developer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
Ahh, I was going off this article, and didn't realize it was a redesign. E: gametheory, not Playdek
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
EvilChameleon posted:I should clarify that the game(s) I want don't have to be super cutthroat, I just don't want it to be basically multiplayer solitaire. I want there to be some interaction between the players. Fozzy, good call on Eminent Domain because I already have it + expansion and it's great. I've played Farmers of the Moor and I'm just waiting to get more plays out of the base game before I try adding the expansion. It's fun but I don't know if I think it's the /best thing ever/. Besides, I want a new game right now, not just an addition to a previous one. I'm pretty happy with 'gric right now as it is. I'm liking the sound of Keyflower still. Would you say the expansions are needed or just nice to have? Troyes is great, I mean I guess you've already played it but it works just as well physically. I've only played it a few times but the different permutations of actions and options seems quite extensive and interesting. I've only played with 2 but I hear it's best with 2 and 3. I'm gonna throw out Dungeon Petz, Istanbul and Concordia as well. Concordia especially is fantastic, it's become one of my absolute favorites. There's quite a bit of player interaction, mostly indirectly, but it's there and works really well. It uses a hand of cards with the actions you can perform, and all you do is pick a card and do what it says, but knowing when and how to use them becomes very interesting. It has a great ebb and flow of actions and resources, but you have almost complete control over your strategy outside of people grabbing the cities/cards that you want. It also plays quite different from most of the other games you've listed, scales wonderfully between 2-5 and plays in 60-120 minutes, maybe close to 150 with 5, though I've only played with up to 4. Istanbul is a fast playing worker placement/pick up and deliver. It has a really cool spatial, almost puzzely, mechanic and a central board that all the players are moving around on that makes it feel quite different from most other worker placement games. Plays in an hour or less I've found even with 5. Dungeon Petz will give you a similar "poo poo I need to do W X Y and Z before the next turn but I can only do X and Y, wtf do I do?!" feeling that Agricola can have, but it plays a bit quicker and has a super charming theme. Very fun and tense game. In regards to Dominant Species, I haven't had the chance to play it yet but is really necessary to be constantly calculating dominance? Don't you only need to do that when something calls for it like when you're performing the Domination actions or cards say something about it? EBag fucked around with this message at 02:15 on Apr 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
You're supposed to calculate it constantly because of how important it is, but it's technically only relevant at one moment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
EBag posted:Troyes is great, I mean I guess you've already played it but it works just as well physically. I've only played it a few times but the different permutations of actions and options seems quite extensive and interesting. I've only played with 2 but I hear it's best with 2 and 3. I was just curious if it was lovely in some way to play in person or if someone with more experience could weigh in because I don't have much experience having only played it a handful of times online -- I don't know if that translates well to the physical version. I also don't know if it would be annoying to teach and have to look up what all the cards mean all the time. How long would you say it takes you to play 2p with someone who knows how the game works? EBag posted:Concordia especially is fantastic, it's become one of my absolute favorites. There's quite a bit of player interaction, mostly indirectly, but it's there and works really well. It uses a hand of cards with the actions you can perform, and all you do is pick a card and do what it says, but knowing when and how to use them becomes very interesting. It has a great ebb and flow of actions and resources, but you have almost complete control over your strategy outside of people grabbing the cities/cards that you want. It also plays quite different from most of the other games you've listed, scales wonderfully between 2-5 and plays in 60-120 minutes, maybe close to 150 with 5, though I've only played with up to 4. I've seen it played a bit, it didn't immediately grab me, but it's on my list of To-Play games. It looks interesting for sure but I am not sure if it's what I am looking for at just this moment, but I'll take a look at a video to see if it changes my mind. EBag posted:Istanbul is a fast playing worker placement/pick up and deliver. It has a really cool spatial, almost puzzely, mechanic and a central board that all the players are moving around on that makes it feel quite different from most other worker placement games. Plays in an hour or less I've found even with 5. I've played Instanbul. I think it's alright, but I didn't love it. It has a lot of neat things going on and I think it's a solid game, but it doesn't grab me in the same way as other games. EBag posted:Dungeon Petz will give you a similar "poo poo I need to do W X Y and Z before the next turn but I can only do X and Y, wtf do I do?!" feeling that Agricola can have, but it plays a bit quicker and has a super charming theme. Very fun and tense game. How would you compare it to Dungeon Lords? I'm already annoyed at it because it has a z at the end but I wouldn't let that deter me from actually getting it. Will it also be coming out with an anniversary edition I might as well wait for? Re: Dominant Species, I understand your complaint Chomp, but I like Suburbia so I don't think that sort of thing would bother me. I just played Euphoria and it sure is a pretty game. I don't know that I love it, but I'd definitely play it again and if it showed up on my shelf I wouldn't be upset. Anyways, my quest has led me to this list now, I think: Keyflower (probably just definitely going to get this, but I might buy more than one game), Troyes, Dungeon Lords or Petz, Dominant Species or Le Havre. Anyone have anything good/bad to say about Le Havre? My only reservation is that I already know lots of people who have it, and I only played it once, but I could see myself getting addicted.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
EvilChameleon posted:I should clarify that the game(s) I want don't have to be super cutthroat, I just don't want it to be basically multiplayer solitaire. I want there to be some interaction between the players. Fozzy, good call on Eminent Domain because I already have it + expansion and it's great. I've played Farmers of the Moor and I'm just waiting to get more plays out of the base game before I try adding the expansion. It's fun but I don't know if I think it's the /best thing ever/. Besides, I want a new game right now, not just an addition to a previous one. I'm pretty happy with 'gric right now as it is. I'm liking the sound of Keyflower still. Would you say the expansions are needed or just nice to have? You don't need the expansions for Keyflower. The base game has plenty of variety. I'd get the Anniversary Edition. It's nice. I'd say it's a tougher game than Petz, since you're really just trying not to lose in Lords. Managing your hand in Petz is pretty interesting, but I have more experience with Petz than Lords. I'm not a big fan of Troyes. I mean, it's alright. It's a fairly aggressive game, since almost anything you do pushes someone else out of a spot. I just don't have a really strong opinion of it. Echophonic fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Apr 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
So, uh, there is a snag in my plan. None of the retailers I know in Canada have Keyflower in stock. The BGG page for R&D games say they only release their games in limited editions. Does this mean I'm boned for finding a copy? Question about Dominant Species: the box says 2-4h. I am assuming the 4h time is for 6 players, but what is a 4p game like in terms of time? I don't mind having a long game but it sort of limits how often I'll get to play it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
EvilChameleon posted:So, uh, there is a snag in my plan. None of the retailers I know in Canada have Keyflower in stock. The BGG page for R&D games say they only release their games in limited editions. Does this mean I'm boned for finding a copy? For Keyflower, ordering from amazon.de is pretty reasonable, and might come even with international shipping to be similar to the regional cost.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
I'm really tempted to start ordering from Amazon.de but some of the shipping stories scare me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:I'm really tempted to start ordering from Amazon.de but some of the shipping stories scare me. What stories are those? And how do I figure out shipping? My German is, well, basically non-existent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
EC: Dungeon Lords is a 4 player game, Le Havre is a 3 player game. They're both playable at other counts but I wouldn't prioritise them. Keyflower is 100% what you want, great euro that's tight and interactive at basically every player count. Regarding Tash-Kalar: I think death match is a poo poo show and 2v2 one of the best modern games around, its a credit to the design that it accommodates people with such opposing opinions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 06:14
|
|
|
EvilChameleon posted:I was just curious if it was lovely in some way to play in person or if someone with more experience could weigh in because I don't have much experience having only played it a handful of times online -- I don't know if that translates well to the physical version. I also don't know if it would be annoying to teach and have to look up what all the cards mean all the time. How long would you say it takes you to play 2p with someone who knows how the game works? I bought Troyes after playing it online a bunch and a teaching game with two new players took about an hour and a half, just like on the box. I'd imagine you can get 2p down to about an hour if you know what's up. The iconography on the cards is okay for the most part. It's important to read up on them the first time through but after that it's not difficult to grasp. My big complaint is that after playing it online so much I basically taught the game wrong in real life. There are a lot of important rules shoved off into the example margins in the book, leading me to miss a lot of not-so-obvious details. The physical game itself runs pretty smoothly. There are a decent amount of little bits but they don't move around very often so the game isn't that fiddly. All that said, if half the thread is saying you should get Keyflower you should probably get Keyflower. I know I really want to play that some day. I think it's actually easier to find than Troyes nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
EvilChameleon posted:Question about Dominant Species: the box says 2-4h. I am assuming the 4h time is for 6 players, but what is a 4p game like in terms of time? I don't mind having a long game but it sort of limits how often I'll get to play it. Our first 4P game took four hours, but everyone was learning. Once you know what you're doing, it's probably 30+30/p.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 09:01
|
|
|
So I played my first game of Quantum (3p) and was wondering if I was doing something wrong because that endgame bogged down haaaard. We were all down to our last cube to place, and it started to basically be a game of whack a mole, where the winner was eventually decided by someone failing a critical roll to stop someone else, which is a rather anticlimactic way of ending things. Was there something I was missing? Was there a clearer path to victory besides trying to drop that last cube on a planet before getting jumped by an army of 2s carrying 1s or being warped by 3s? It was a really fun game before that, but then the smash the leader thing happened and it devolved into a very meh experience. Edit: Might as well say that I played Xenoshyft Onslaught, which was a thoroughly mediocre co-op deckbuilder in the same veins as Legendary or something. I liked it better than Legendary, since we didn't have to deal with random non-coop shenaniganry, but it did nothing for me otherwise. Quarterbacking galore. I also played Spectre Ops, which I might have liked better if shooting resolution was something other than dice rolling. You're taking a deduction game and adding an element of dice rolling to it? Get the gently caress out of here. If you're at all interested, play Letters From Whitechapel instead. GrandpaPants fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Apr 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 09:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:12 |
|
|
I only like 1v1 high form TK and really dislike any other forms of play 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 09:17
|
|
