|
I need to inform all of you that my girlfriend and I managed to get 30 points in Hanabi with the rainbow colour added in. We are amazing. Thank you.
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 10:20 |
|
|
EBag posted: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. For me, there was no point to Caylus Magna Carta; there isn't much streamlining and minimal variability. Every time I played it, I wished I had just played straight Caylus instead, so I ended up trading it away.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
Trasson posted:Shouldn't he have lost a turn due to losing a bunch of troops? Should have read further in the rule book: • If Volkare lost at least twice as many tokens from his army as there are players in the game, he is slowed down (no matter who initiated the combat). Turn his Round Order token face down (unless it already is face down). Next time it is his turn to play, he just µ ips his Round Order token back and his turn is over. drat.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
Big McHuge posted:Except the direct player interaction in Eclipse is a dumpsterfire. Only the combat. Taking over systems and forming alliances and politicking are still good. The combat is hot garbage, yeah, but the rest of the game is solid.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 16:16
|
|
|
sonatinas posted:Should have read further in the rule book: To be fair this only happens in one of his scenarios, easy to skip over.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted: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. I haven't played TM but I've played Hansa Teutonica a few times now and a guy I game with said it sort of felt like TM mixed with Ticket to Ride. I'm not sure how true that is, but HT is an awesome game. It's not really an economic game, though there is an action economy to the game, and there seem to be a huge amount of different strategies. I've played it a few times now and feel like there's still lots of different strategies I want to try. It's also highly interactive and a not-a-worker-placement gamers game, though very streamlined and fast playing. We finished out last 5 player game in just over an hour. Don't let the bland visual design scare you off, it's a very well designed game. EBag fucked around with this message at 16:58 on May 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
HT is being republished including the expansions. CSI has them up for preorder.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Do you need On the Brink to use the lab portion of In the Lab for base Pandemic?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:Only the combat. Taking over systems and forming alliances and politicking are still good. This is a complaint I've seen before but never really understood. What's the garbage? In my experience, Eclipse gives you a combat system that is very random during the first and possibly second turn of the game (which leads to lots of rolling 2 dice and looking for sixes, bad guy rolls 2 dice looking for 5s, you roll two dice looking for sixes...) and that would be awful it kept up that way as fleet sizes grow, except that the game then hands you a literal bag full of ways to mess with your die rolls and make combat horrifically unfair in your favor and tells you to just go nuts. The game also ensures that anything you pick in turn allows other players to pick up a counter which is generally cheaper but of course if they're countering you they aren't countering the player on their other side... which is what leads to all the cool politics and alliances and agreements to have border skirmishes instead of all out wars. All in all it's a pretty decent system. I can see it would be terrible if people refused to upgrade their ships and people were rolling buckets full of dice trying to roll sixes, but I think you could just slap on a decent computer and murder those players silly until they learned to not be terrible.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Do you need On the Brink to use the lab portion of In the Lab for base Pandemic? No, the Lab Challenge does not require OTB. The Panic Mutation Challenge and enhanced Virulent Strain Challenge require OTB. I cannot remember if the Team Competitive variant requires OTB. However, the Lab Challenge is much better if you have the purple disease in play, either through the Mutation Challenge or the BioTerrorist Challenge. Both of which require OTB.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
Ohthehugemanatee posted:This is a complaint I've seen before but never really understood. What's the garbage? Some people hate the idea that drawing VP for the loser could in some cases give the loser more VPs than they feel a battle's loser would or should be entitled to. Some people hate the endless roll-reroll-reroll-reroll-reroll-reroll... just waiting for 6s to happen that can happen in some battles where both sides have lovely offensive capabilities and a lot of defensive ones. I think that about covers it though.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
Just got my copy of Argent. It comes with one baggie fewer than the number of token colors (six player colors, gold research tokens, white universal tokens). This actually bothers me more than the games I have that didn't come with any baggies at all.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:Some people hate dice for resolving anything at all. Also plasma missiles. They're less of an issue with the expansion, but otherwise...
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:Some people hate dice for resolving anything at all. Most people hate missiles. Unless they're using missile at which point they love missiles. The expansion provides several counters to missiles.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
Benly posted:Just got my copy of Argent. It comes with one baggie fewer than the number of token colors (six player colors, gold research tokens, white universal tokens). This actually bothers me more than the games I have that didn't come with any baggies at all. Just wait until you try to put everything in the organizer! 
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
Re: eclipse It's mostly that combat devolves into "only hit on a 6" in almost every combat. Sure, you have the +2 computer, but I have the -2 shields. Roll to hit is an ancient hoary thing that should be left by the wayside. However, I love eclipse. It's one of my favorite games, and I always want to play it. The combat is sloggy, sure, but the rest of the game makes up for it.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
Ohthehugemanatee posted:This is a complaint I've seen before but never really understood. What's the garbage? For me, the random resolution system just stinks, and kills my enjoyment of the game. It's partly the roll-reroll-reroll thing, it's partly the rock-paper-scissors-y nature of the build process, it's partly the direct combat... but it's mostly that over the course of the hundreds of rolls over a 9-round game, it's quite likely that someone will get hosed by the dice. I FAR prefer games where you determine randomness THEN cope with it, than games where you determine strategy and see whether luck hates you. E: for me, I think the rest of the game isn't good enough to cope with the lovely combat. It's OK, but it's not exceptional, and OK-but-not-exceptional plus bad chunks makes for a game I don't much enjoy, especially with a MASSIVE AP dude and political arguer in the group.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
Benly posted:Just got my copy of Argent. It comes with one baggie fewer than the number of token colors (six player colors, gold research tokens, white universal tokens). This actually bothers me more than the games I have that didn't come with any baggies at all. Argent is an absolutely AMAZING GAME, but one of its big flaws is one that is shared across all Level99 games, the insert/packaging SUCKS. Hell even pixel tactics is impossible to store in the box it came in with the directions it came with. Battlecon is horrible about this, Pixel Tactics is horrible about this, Argent is bad about this, and I guarantee that when Millenium Blades comes out it will be a thematic, amazing game, WITH poo poo inserts for storage. The other problem across all of Level99 games is that they don't have a good technical writer so niche cases often have to be resolved by fiat. Their games are wonderful in spite of that though. thespaceinvader posted:For me, the random resolution system just stinks, and kills my enjoyment of the game. It's partly the roll-reroll-reroll thing, it's partly the rock-paper-scissors-y nature of the build process, it's partly the direct combat... but it's mostly that over the course of the hundreds of rolls over a 9-round game, it's quite likely that someone will get hosed by the dice. I guess this explains why you spent so much time on the 4e Char Op forums, you hate excessive variance, and charop really helps cut down on that.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
I don't mind variance per se but rolling d6s until someone gets a hit is design that was outmoded in 1953.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
re: Argent, I have the go7gaming organizer and all of the expansions, it all fits snuggly in the base box but sleeving anything beyond the voters is out of the question I think. re: Eclipse, if you were to directly graft on a combat system from another game without much modification, what would it be? I think I like the combat in Kemet/GoT better but not sure if it's always a good fit for a game because tracking seen combat cards via pencil and paper is not the sexiest mechanic either in my mind. Not debating that the d6 system isn't sucky but I'm not sure I'm totally in love with another implementation out there either but i might just be naive My issue with these civ games that allow for directed attacking is the Nancy Kerrigan effect that I talked about earlier. I've played Eclipse on iPad but have yet to table it and I worry that I'm going to get a crowbar to the knee early and slog through a few hours but we'll see! Probably going to play it in person in the next week or two
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
quote:except that the game then hands you a literal bag full of ways to mess with your die rolls and make combat horrifically unfair in your favor and tells you to just go nuts Well... it offers one real way to mess with your die rolls. And most of the time you'll get it. And then they'll get shields and you're back to rolling for 6s. And in many cases you never leave 6 town - eg. if you go small missile ships, it's pretty much always better to just put more missiles on than to bother researching and equipping computers (and then sometimes unequipping them once people shield). So there's one strategy where you roll 20+ dice at once, and another where you roll 20+ dice taking turns hoping for 6s (and sometimes 5s). But that's not really my complaint - my complaint is how swingy it all is. We're all reasonably competent players, and quite often the game involves combat between relatively evenly matched fleets (ie. if they fought ten times, there'd be a reasonable split in who won) - but very seldom is a fight actually close. Regardless of tech, fights tend to snowball one way or the other very hard, meaning victors often lose very little material, while losers either lose lots (or lose VP by retreating). This is random and unsatisfying in a game that otherwise is satisfyingly strategic. quote:I don't mind variance per se but rolling d6s until someone gets a hit is design that was outmoded in 1953. Well, for example, Risk actually avoided some of Eclipse's problem by capping the number of dice you roll. This avoids the positive feedback loop that amplifies the affect of the first few rolls. jmzero fucked around with this message at 22:00 on May 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Madmarker posted:I guess this explains why you spent so much time on the 4e Char Op forums, you hate excessive variance, and charop really helps cut down on that. To some extent, yes. I also like fiddling with bits of systems, building satisfying engines etc etc, which is why I really WANT to like Eclipse - it's got a lovely set of systems to fiddle with, particularly in the ships and techs, but its flaws just dominate it in play for me, in practice - I spend so much time listening to the other players complain and argue about who should do what (and yes, do my share of that too) that it just gets really tiresome in play. I don't much like political games where a large part of play is persuading the other players that you're less threatening or the other guy is more threatening than you and so they should attack him instead - mostly because I'm bad at it, both from the point of view of doing the persuading, and from the point of view of being easily swayed. It's why I like Dominion, it's why I like Viticulture, Russian Railroads, Tzolk'in, etc etc, it's why I've really gone off Eclipse, it's why I really didn't like Clash of Cultures, etc. I like building an engine out of semi-random stuff and testing it against my opponents' skill at doing the same, I really dislike building something and watching it come crashing down around my ears without any control And yet, I love Galaxy Trucker - mostly because in Galaxy Trucker, that's the whole point of the game. I'm much more OK with it when it's an intentionally designed part of the game, but in a lot of 4x type games, they add randomised combat systems for no particular reason I can determine other than because the culture they've grown up in says combat should be resolved by rolling dice - and it's just plain bad design, that's far, far too prevalent. I've worked out a lot of things about why I like the games I like over the past year or so, if it's interesting enough to anyone I've been meaning to start a blog...
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
A direct graft? I dunno, I do love the GoT/Kemet approach. Just have your shields and cannons and poo poo change your or your opponents number directly. Like an interceptor is a 1, but cannons make it a 2, or shields make your opponent -1. This kinda front loads the math, but that stuff is front loaded in card combat anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
Imagine Eclipse, but with Dune-style combat. Complete with traitors. 
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
Even better use the Duel expansion from Dune and have your leaders fight to death in an arena to resolve intergalactic disputes (I haven't played with Duel and I'm sure it's probably actually terrible)
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
We need more tactical fighting games that resolve combat through dexterity mechanics like a quick few rounds of Click Clack Lumberjack with cards you earn in-game that grant you bonuses, like extra hits.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Echophonic posted:Just wait until you try to put everything in the organizer! Yeah I am not really entirely clear on what's supposed to go where (other than the room tiles and card decks which are pretty obvious). The go7 organizer sounds nice but I am not really in a position where I can afford a 23-dollar insert to make a single board game organize more neatly.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
Maybe there's a way to use a crt. Derive an attack strength from firepower x computer strength against def strength of hull pieces x shield strength. Roll against the crt, with results dependent on the ratio, alternating until there's a winner or a retreat. I might go workshop this.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:We need more tactical fighting games that resolve combat through dexterity mechanics like a quick few rounds of Click Clack Lumberjack with cards you earn in-game that grant you bonuses, like extra hits. I've thought for a while now that there should be a FG-inspired board game where, once the neutral breaks and someone initiates a combo, a Catacombs-style flicking minigame happens and you have to flick a little disk at targets to actually successfully complete the combo. You could do things like have big characters get to use a bigger disk but get less flicks, and have it so damage scaling encourages resets (maybe by having a dropped combo reset neutral with you at some sort of disadvantage).
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
The End posted:Maybe there's a way to use a crt. Derive an attack strength from firepower x computer strength against def strength of hull pieces x shield strength. Roll against the crt, with results dependent on the ratio, alternating until there's a winner or a retreat. I might go workshop this. Super down with this.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:re: Eclipse, if you were to directly graft on a combat system from another game without much modification, what would it be? I think I like the combat in Kemet/GoT better but not sure if it's always a good fit for a game because tracking seen combat cards via pencil and paper is not the sexiest mechanic either in my mind. Not debating that the d6 system isn't sucky but I'm not sure I'm totally in love with another implementation out there either but i might just be naive Ew, who's doing this? Throw Cheetos at them for being a nerd. I like dice but Eclipse triggers the biggest thing I hate about massive wargames like 40K where you throw metric fistfulls of dice with a single target number and a million modifiers to go with it. It's not fun to me especially when a game regularly has you throw more dice than it actually provides! I have three personally approved combat resolution mechanics: Limited Dice: There should always be a maximum to the amount of dice you roll. Your extra units are buffers or mods. 1-3 is the sweet spot, any more and I start to get annoyed. Specialty Dice: I really like specialty dice. Sure, hitting a "retreat" or "hit" in 1812 is the equivalent of rolling a 1 or 6 but I can equate symbols to actions better than I can raw numbers. I will shake whoever at FFG decided to go with specialty dice for their Star Wars games because that's a miniatures system I can actually get behind. Card Modified: As seen in Kemet. I have full control over my attack but to my opponent it's practically equivalent to me rolling randomly since they're uncertain what I'll play. Bonus points if everyone's cards are the same so while the result is uncertain you can at least make guesses to what it'll be. I am interested in more novel ways to express combat in board games. I haven't played it but I'm interested in trying out Shogun where you dump cubes into a tower and see what comes out. There's also a godawful A Game of Thrones RTS/board game hybrid that has a neat system with a global stability/peace meter that penalizes you for being openly aggressive but as you perform sabotage and subterfuge the peace will dwindle until you can declare war and everyone backs you on it. If I ever designed a civilization game I'd steal the poo poo out of that.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
The End posted:Maybe there's a way to use a crt. Derive an attack strength from firepower x computer strength against def strength of hull pieces x shield strength. Roll against the crt, with results dependent on the ratio, alternating until there's a winner or a retreat. I might go workshop this. IMO make it a simple firepower table, with shields and computers providing column shifts. Missles retain first strike capability.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:We need more tactical fighting games that resolve combat through dexterity mechanics like a quick few rounds of Click Clack Lumberjack with cards you earn in-game that grant you bonuses, like extra hits. Dice rolling is just a dexterity minigame which being good at will get you accused of cheating.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
al-azad posted:Ew, who's doing this? Throw Cheetos at them for being a nerd. Eh, normally I'm fine with ignoring hidden trackable information, but remembering which cards someone has played in Kemet makes such a significant difference in your chances of success that it boils down to whether you want memorization to be a significant element of player skill in the game or not. It's much more impactful in this game than others, I think. So it leaves me conflicted. I think writing down seen cards in most games is try-hard as hell, but I don't want to be spending my whole game trying to remember if someone has a 4 in hand or not either. Edit: I just reread the rules and I guess you can look at discard piles if you choose to play that way up front. Next time we'll just do that I guess. fozzy fosbourne fucked around with this message at 23:07 on May 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
al-azad posted:Card Modified: As seen in Kemet. I have full control over my attack but to my opponent it's practically equivalent to me rolling randomly since they're uncertain what I'll play. Bonus points if everyone's cards are the same so while the result is uncertain you can at least make guesses to what it'll be. I don't think symmetrical cards are necessarily preferable for me. Battlecon, though the players use the same bases, has character specific asymmetrical cards that work well. The important thing here is knowing what options the opponent has. For Eclipse, I could see combat cards being yet another difference between the races.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Eh, normally I'm fine with ignoring hidden trackable information, but remembering which cards someone has played in Kemet makes such a significant difference in your chances of success that it boils down to whether you want memorization to be a significant element of player skill in the game or not. It's much more impactful in this game than others, I think. I brought this up when I first bought Kemet but I thought it was very strange that the rules give you the option of discarding face up or down. Running through this online game of El Grande has made me question the necessity of public hidden information (the known unknown's as Mr. Rumsfeld put it). If everyone publicly knows what I have, but it's kept hidden, it loses its veracity when nothing says they can't write it down. It's not the same as the "gentleman rule" of miniatures games where you can't measure before you declare an action, you're legitimately introducing an element that can be tracked (in El Grande's case it's mandatory) but insist on keeping it hidden.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Eh, normally I'm fine with ignoring hidden trackable information, but remembering which cards someone has played in Kemet makes such a significant difference in your chances of success that it boils down to whether you want memorization to be a significant element of player skill in the game or not. It's much more impactful in this game than others, I think. Just have everyone put their cards face up in front of them. No nonsense and gets rid of the crappy memorization issues. I think this is either the official way to play or an official variant, as I'm sure I remember something about choosing to make discards also viewable or not.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
The Supreme Court posted:Just have everyone put their cards face up in front of them. No nonsense and gets rid of the crappy memorization issues. I think this is either the official way to play or an official variant, as I'm sure I remember something about choosing to make discards also viewable or not. Yeah, I just checked, it's an official variant in the rules. We should just do that.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 10:20 |
|
|
Imagine Eclipse with THAC0.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 00:01
|
|