|
This is honestly my second favourite picture from that afternoon.
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 18:17 |
|
|
medchem posted:I brought Tash Kalar to my gaming group a few weeks ago, and I got several "Umm wth is that?" type of reluctant comments. They then proceeded to go on and play Space Alert. Man I'm so sorry. Last night we played a 3 pl deathmatch melee with the whit,e green, and yellow decks. I've now warmed up to the non high form modes of play. It was just as interesting and tactical as the high form. I guess I didn't think it was a a full game compared to high form; however, I think it works well after playing a few games of it. The green deck is a beast in that mode though.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 14:12
|
|
|
I know Caylus gets quite a bit of love here so I was wondering what you guys think of Magna Carta after checking out Rahdo's runthrough for it. I haven't played Caylus but I like the idea that it's supposed to retain most of what makes Caylus interesting (for me it's the player driven economy/buildings) while streamlining it and adding variability.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
Got a chance to try out some gamse that I didn't want to purchase for myself this weekend, turns out I was right not to! Miskatonic School for Girls is the first market row style deck builder I've played, and it just felt disorienting. Each card has four values and one of the pairs is exclusive but the other pair you can use both of except you have no control over whether or not you'll be able to actually use them. There's a ton of cards that don't really do anything except have numbers on them, and then some cards have numbers that they can't actually use (the Lockers). The worst part is a lot of my issues with the game seem like they could be fixed really easily? Why not just have it so that when you fight the faculty cards you draw a new hand first, and then play BFF cards from your hand? Just make it so that you draw a card for each Faculty member and if it's a teacher you can immediately toss it to someone. Wouldn't make it a game I was trying to play constantly but it would fix a lot of the bad randomness. Red Dragon Inn felt like someone had a cool idea for a drinking game but then added a few other half thought out mechanics. The drink deck is probably the best part of the whole game, but the gambling part feels really pasted on. The game was at it's best when we were passing around terrible drinks and getting into fist fights, but then the whole flow of the game slows down when I have to double check if any of the cards in my hand can be used to stop something from happening to me (we were playing 4, maybe the earlier ones have less complicated cards). I liked the Drence (legally distinct from Drow) Fighter even if it seemed like he had a lot of extra complication for very little gain. We played two rounds and neither felt particularly engaging.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Jedit posted:The original KS price was $99+p&p. I don't know what that is in maple syrup but I'm sure you do. There's probably some markup as the CCE was limited to 3700 copies, at least 2875 of which were sold to backers. This is good to know. It looks like I'd be paying an inflated price just to get a nice holder for the two boxes. I don't own nor do I plan to buy Euphoria so having a mini-expac for that makes no difference to me. Metal coins are nice, but I don't really see the point. I guess I'll just go with the regular boxes. Thanks duders.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
The mini-expansion is for VIticulture, it's just... Euphoria themed. Also I think all copies of Tuscany have the Euphoria mini-expansion. The metal coins are pretty great, and everybody that's played with them has loved them, but they didn't pay for them either...
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:The mini-expansion is for VIticulture, it's just... Euphoria themed. Also I think all copies of Tuscany have the Euphoria mini-expansion. The metal coins are pretty great, and everybody that's played with them has loved them, but they didn't pay for them either... If you had to bling out one board game resource, "money" is a really solid one and the Viticulture ones feel great. Granted, I'm fairly certain using lira with like wine grapes on them aren't the most thematic for, say, Netrunner, but they're large coins with a good weight to them that are applicable to a LOT of games.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
Played Alchemists this afternoon. God, what an awful game. One of the other players was happily chatting away from about round three about how he'd already identified what each ingredient was. I hadn't identified a single one beyond doubt by the end of the game. I did 6 experiments (with ingredient combinations unknown to me) over the course of the game and four of them were green (the others were one neutral and one red) which didn't provide the information needed to fill out the grid. Everyone else was talking about how at some point they got enough information to deduce everything about the grid, which didn't happen even in the slightest for me. If I wanted to spend nearly two hours playing a game where I get ruled out based on bad luck, I'll play Settlers... Happily, I got to play Agricola afterwards, which took the bad taste out of my mouth.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Could someone please give me some specific examples for what "engine" means in a board gaming context? I'm still quite new to this whole board gaming thing and keep reading and hearing about "building an engine" in this or that game, and I think I have a vague idea about what it might mean, but wouldn't mind a bit of clarification. I'm already more or less familiar with basic concepts and types of mechanics like worker placement, drafting etc., but it's kinda difficult to google for "board game engine" when all I get are results for programming engines for app versions of board games.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
poronty posted:Could someone please give me some specific examples for what "engine" means in a board gaming context? I'm still quite new to this whole board gaming thing and keep reading and hearing about "building an engine" in this or that game, and I think I have a vague idea about what it might mean, but wouldn't mind a bit of clarification. I'm already more or less familiar with basic concepts and types of mechanics like worker placement, drafting etc., but it's kinda difficult to google for "board game engine" when all I get are results for programming engines for app versions of board games. An engine is something you assemble in a game in order to achieve the win condition for the game.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
poronty posted:Could someone please give me some specific examples for what "engine" means in a board gaming context? I'm still quite new to this whole board gaming thing and keep reading and hearing about "building an engine" in this or that game, and I think I have a vague idea about what it might mean, but wouldn't mind a bit of clarification. I'm already more or less familiar with basic concepts and types of mechanics like worker placement, drafting etc., but it's kinda difficult to google for "board game engine" when all I get are results for programming engines for app versions of board games. Here's a pretty good example from Dominion. Say that I've got a deck full of Warehouses and Tunnels.   Warehouse + Tunnel is obviously a combo to generate a lot of free Golds. But, if I start feeding those Golds to another card, like Apprentice (which draws me 6 cards each time it eats a Gold), I've created an Engine.  I'm using the resources generated by one part of my strategy to feed another part of my strategy in a synergistic fashion. That's an Engine.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
An engine example would be baking bread in Agricola - it requires the following parts: at least one grain, at least one plowed field, clay, usually stone, a use of the major improvement square, at least one use of the plow a field and bake bread action. Thats alot of moving parts, but when its up and running it will reliably produce huge amounts of food for your family. There are ways to make it run more efficiently (baking occs/minors, more ovens, adding a cooking hearth etc. etc.) but fundamentally thats an engine that makes obtaining food massively easier, and so makes winning the game massively easier.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
poronty posted:Could someone please give me some specific examples for what "engine" means in a board gaming context? I'm still quite new to this whole board gaming thing and keep reading and hearing about "building an engine" in this or that game, and I think I have a vague idea about what it might mean, but wouldn't mind a bit of clarification. I'm already more or less familiar with basic concepts and types of mechanics like worker placement, drafting etc., but it's kinda difficult to google for "board game engine" when all I get are results for programming engines for app versions of board games. An engine, in board game terms, is a combination of multiple individual effects that let you transform one resource (money, cards, time, widgets, points) into another resource at a profit. That's pretty esoteric, so let's look at a more specific example. Take Dominion. In Dominion, you start a turn with five cards and one action, with the hopeful goal of getting enough money cards in hand to buy something nice, like a big VP card. The classic Dominion engine is a deck full of Villages and Smithies.   So you have a hand of five cards. A Village, a Smithy, and some random cash and estates. You have five cards and one action. You play the Village as an action, drawing a card and gaining two actions. You now have five cards and two actions. You play the Smithy as an action, drawing three cards. You have seven cards and one action. Hopefully, you've drawn another Village and another Smithy here. Every time you repeat this cycle, you gain two more cards in hand, while still having an action left over. This is an Engine.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Hammerite posted:Played Alchemists this afternoon. God, what an awful game. Did they actually have the info or were they bluffing? An important part of the game is being able to bluff your way through with limited info. If you can publish faster with some right info then you'll be doing better than people who spent all their time figuring out the whole matrix. You could also have been doing experiments in a bad way, ie you should try to solve one ingredient instead of just randomly mashing things together to try to piece things together. I just looked at BGG's rankings today and Alchemists is top 100 now, just above Glory to Rome. I thought it was alright but maybe not that good. I dunno -- the goonsensus seems kinda lukewarm?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
Is Sushi Go as brainless as it seems at first glance? A member of my group brought it saying it's like 7 Wonders but faster. After a finishing a game of it, I think it's no coincidence that the same player decided 7 Wonders was boring after four plays.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
cbirdsong posted:Is Sushi Go as brainless as it seems at first glance? Do you like irritating everyone around you by hitting a bell every 12 seconds? Then you'll love Sushi Go.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 00:20
|
|
|
Thanks to everyone for all the great examples, I think I'm getting it now. It's pretty straightforward now that I think about it. For some reason I assumed that an engine was like those cascading series of actions that get longer and longer every time you add to them, like the columns of building cards in Deus, or the row of buildings along the road in Caylus where all the buildings are activated in sequence every turn. Yeah, I still have a lot of catching up to do in board game theory, but it's all pretty exciting and interesting.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Do you like irritating everyone around you by hitting a bell every 12 seconds? Then you'll love Sushi Go. That's Sushi Dice.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
cbirdsong posted:Is Sushi Go as brainless as it seems at first glance? A member of my group brought it saying it's like 7 Wonders but faster. After a finishing a game of it, I think it's no coincidence that the same player decided 7 Wonders was boring after four plays. How exactly is it brainless? It's drafting boiled down to basics, but there is strategy.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
Sushi Go is light, but totally rad.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:How exactly is it brainless? It's drafting boiled down to basics, but there is strategy. It seems like because you can't know the makeup of the cards in play, you can't really make any concrete plans, like you can in 7 Wonders. Because the cards in play are just a random subset of the deck, you could put down a wasabi card on hand 3 since you haven't seen many nigiri cards, and then not end up seeing any for the rest of the game. Same for how many maki (military) cards are even available each round. You can only play cards and hope for the best.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
cbirdsong posted:Is Sushi Go as brainless as it seems at first glance? A member of my group brought it saying it's like 7 Wonders but faster. After a finishing a game of it, I think it's no coincidence that the same player decided 7 Wonders was boring after four plays. It's 7 Wonders without expansions except quicker and easier to understand. Personally I find stripping it down to the basics makes it more enjoyable.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
cbirdsong posted:It seems like because you can't know the makeup of the cards in play, you can't really make any concrete plans, like you can in 7 Wonders. Because the cards in play are just a random subset of the deck, you could put down a wasabi card on hand 3 since you haven't seen many nigiri cards, and then not end up seeing any for the rest of the game. Same for how many maki (military) cards are even available each round. You can only play cards and hope for the best. Play with three, you literally know every card in play by hand 3. It's a solid game if very light.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
cbirdsong posted:It seems like because you can't know the makeup of the cards in play, you can't really make any concrete plans, like you can in 7 Wonders. Because the cards in play are just a random subset of the deck, you could put down a wasabi card on hand 3 since you haven't seen many nigiri cards, and then not end up seeing any for the rest of the game. Same for how many maki (military) cards are even available each round. You can only play cards and hope for the best. The smaller the group of players, the easier it is to see all the cards in the round. In a two-player game, you've seen all the cards still in rotation after keeping only one card, and you have the information available for the other nine cards you'll select. In a five-player game, you select four cards before you know all the cards, and then the game is nearly over. That's a bit random, but two-player felt a bit simplistic to me. There's a very different feel to both of them. Zark the Damned posted:That's Sushi Dice. Huh. I only bought Sushi Go because I also confused it with this...
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
Zark the Damned posted:That's Sushi Dice. Plot twist: Jedit hasn't actually ever heard of Sushi Dice, he just misunderstood the rules to Sushi Go so badly he thought there was a bell involved.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 03:10
|
|
|
BonHair posted:Rumor has it that Junta is getting a reprint this summer. Does anyone know if the game actually holds up, or if I just have fond memories of playing it with ancient roleplayers? Nope nope nope. My memory of Junta is being all like "hey, I can help? Anyone? I can do stuff too." And the others being like "no, we've got this poo poo locked up without you. We can just ignore you the rest of the game." And me being "oh. okay."
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
Sushi Go is a great filler if you play it at full tilt. Just remind everyone that it's simulating one of those conveyor belts and they've gotta go go go before the food passes them by.Scyther posted:Plot twist: Jedit hasn't actually ever heard of Sushi Dice, he just misunderstood the rules to Sushi Go so badly he thought there was a bell involved. lol
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Nope nope nope. My memory of Junta is being all like "hey, I can help? Anyone? I can do stuff too." And the others being like "no, we've got this poo poo locked up without you. We can just ignore you the rest of the game." And me being "oh. okay." I've only played it the one time, my experience is that it essentially becomes Munchkin at the end. Wouldn't care to repeat the experience.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:Sushi Go is a great filler if you play it at full tilt. Just remind everyone that it's simulating one of those conveyor belts and they've gotta go go go before the food passes them by. This. When we play, everyone strives to play in approximately half a second, and when you've decided, you have to drum your fingers against the table to stress out anyone still thinking. You also have to shout "HAI!" the second the last player has chosen. Jimbozig posted:Nope nope nope. My memory of Junta is being all like "hey, I can help? Anyone? I can do stuff too." And the others being like "no, we've got this poo poo locked up without you. We can just ignore you the rest of the game." And me being "oh. okay." The thing I liked was that alliances were not set in stone at all, there was a bunch of negotiation going on when I last played it, including probably too much roleplaying. But I suppose I should just play Game of Thrones if I wanted that experience, although the theme doesn't lend itself to that much crazy storytelling. Seriously, the navy guy requesting tonnes of money for his new "submarine screendoor project" and actually getting it is amazing. It's not mechanically relevant, but it makes for good stories. DumbparameciuM posted:I've only played it the one time, my experience is that it essentially becomes Munchkin at the end. Wouldn't care to repeat the experience. Doesn't it have a set number of rounds? Of course you're supposed to gang up on the leader and kick him in the nuts, that's the entire point, but that goes for most direct interaction games really. I don't see how it can go all munchkin without being able to drag out?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 08:17
|
|
|
Scyther posted:Plot twist: Jedit hasn't actually ever heard of Sushi Dice, he just misunderstood the rules to Sushi Go so badly he thought there was a bell involved. Too many lovely games based around raw fish, and I only saw it as Spiel where we spent a lot of time either actively avoiding the stand where it was being demoed or walking past very quickly when we had no choice. Also, you're an idiot.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 08:52
|
|
|
This is like a restaurant review saying "just some derivative hippy vegan place, don't bother" because it was too popular to get a table and the patrons wore coloured clothes.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 08:58
|
|
|
EvilChameleon posted:Did they actually have the info or were they bluffing? An important part of the game is being able to bluff your way through with limited info. If you can publish faster with some right info then you'll be doing better than people who spent all their time figuring out the whole matrix. You could also have been doing experiments in a bad way, ie you should try to solve one ingredient instead of just randomly mashing things together to try to piece things together. Maybe I have been slightly harsh on the game, but it will be a good while before I try playing it again. I don't think a mix of bluff and deductive logic is something that's to my taste in general to be honest. I did towards the end of the game conclude "ok, everyone else's published theories are consistent with what I know and consistent amongst themselves, so what if I just go along with it and publish/endorse a few things" and that worked out ok but it was essentially flipping a coin; I could have chosen something incorrect and been punished for it (having done nothing much to deserve it) or I could have chosen correctly (this is what happened) and gotten rewarded (despite bumbling through like a clown). In the end I came 3rd out of 4 people because I took that approach. Doesn't seem good to me.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 10:32
|
|
|
I played Alchemists on the weekend and had a good time with it. I've been toying with the idea of designing a game about the world of academia, where you are racing against others to produce papers and it's more about being prominent than publishing correctly, and Alchemists is literally exactly that game already. It does seem prone to luck; I just happened to make a potion in the first turn that was exactly what one of the adventurers was wanting, so could sell to him right away for full price. The artifact market seems a bit flawed too, as they are all claimed immediately if they are slightly useful, leaving one of the four players out of luck. The highlight was realising that I'd published a completely wrong theory immediately after publishing it, and having to race others to debunk it so I wouldn't lose points (as I'd hedged on Green when publishing, but both Green and Blue were wrong). bobvonunheil fucked around with this message at 12:11 on May 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 12:08
|
|
|
Had a heart breaking moment in Mage Knight's Volkare's Quest. 3 player game, Volkare is one space from the portal. We are assaulting his camp. 2/3 of us kill our allotment of his troops in cooperative combat. There are just two dragons left after the assault. I look through Volkare's discard deck and there is only one card left that will lose the game for us if he draws is (blue spell). There are 8 cards left in the deck. It's now his turn(we assaulted on first player's turn and Volkare is 2nd). He draws the loving blue spell and we lose. It was an awesome time. Looking forward to beating him next time.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
Played Terra Mystica 3 more times this weekend, fun times. Nice to play a heavy euro that isn't another (strictly) worker placement and has asymmetrical sides. The interaction is limited but interesting. Although there is some real potential to stuff someone early on. I wonder what people would consider the most similar games to Terra Mystica. Maybe economic games with a bunch of interconnected systems and a map of some sort? Most worker placement games don't feature an income without it being the result of your action selection so they feel different to me. It would need to feature a few currencies and a lot of goods processing, too. fozzy fosbourne fucked around with this message at 15:02 on May 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Played Terra Mystica 3 more times this weekend, fun times. Nice to play a heavy euro that isn't another (strictly) worker placement and has asymmetrical sides. The interaction is limited but interesting. Although there is some real potential to stuff someone early on. Eclipse is very similar, with more direct player interaction. The mechanisms play in a similar manner, and the factions are also asymmetric.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:Eclipse is very similar, with more direct player interaction. The mechanisms play in a similar manner, and the factions are also asymmetric. Except the direct player interaction in Eclipse is a dumpsterfire.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:Eclipse is very similar, with more direct player interaction. The mechanisms play in a similar manner, and the factions are also asymmetric. Yeah, I guess it plays like a civilization game without the naked aggression. Which is kind of cool, since the targeted player attacks always seem like the most iffy features of multiplayer civ games.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
sonatinas posted:Had a heart breaking moment in Mage Knight's Volkare's Quest. 3 player game, Volkare is one space from the portal. We are assaulting his camp. 2/3 of us kill our allotment of his troops in cooperative combat. There are just two dragons left after the assault. I look through Volkare's discard deck and there is only one card left that will lose the game for us if he draws is (blue spell). There are 8 cards left in the deck. It's now his turn(we assaulted on first player's turn and Volkare is 2nd). He draws the loving blue spell and we lose. It was an awesome time. Looking forward to beating him next time. Shouldn't he have lost a turn due to losing a bunch of troops?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 18:17 |
|
|
Trasson posted:Shouldn't he have lost a turn due to losing a bunch of troops? poo poo...Will need to read the manual and see.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 15:18
|
|