|
Azran posted:Got a doubt regarding Skull: What stops a player from playing a Rose and then just bidding for one, since he has to reveal his disks first? That someone may outbid him, call two, reveal his rose and reveal his now that they know he has a guaranteed (or is it?) rose? I can't find anything in the rules (http://www.skull-and-roses.com/pdf/Skull_EnP.pdf) that says otherwise, but I just want to be sure. Well, yeah. That they might be outbid by someone else. What's the doubt?
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
Oldstench posted:Not sure I understand. Everyone plays at least one disk, then the first player chooses to say 1 or play another. If p1 bids 1, then someone is likely to bid 2 before everyone pushes in. If you're playing 2 player Skull, I don't know what to tell you. Fat Turkey posted:Well, yeah. That they might be outbid by someone else. What's the doubt? Even in heads up Skull (which could happen eventually as the game has elimination) the first player could have played a skull first. You can win a game of Skull just by eliminating other players. You don't have to win a single bid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
In anyone has Clash of Cultures: Civilizations and would be willing to help me with a bit of transcription (only a bit, I promise), please hit me up via PM. It's getting pretty annoying to source the drat thing. Look at this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
Going to play farmers of the moor for the first time with 3 or 4 players. Going with occupations using the E and I decks. Are there any cards that are plain broken with FotM? is the 4 FotM and 3 vanilla minor improvements like the rulebook suggests ok? Anything I should house rule? I've played quite a lot of vanilla, one player has played a lot of vanilla also, one complete newbie and one player who has played 2 vanilla games.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
As far as I know there is nothing completely broken, just make sure to hog the horse action as much as possible. Those things are worth a ton of points.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
Sistergodiva posted:Going to play farmers of the moor for the first time with 3 or 4 players. Going with occupations using the E and I decks. Are there any cards that are plain broken with FotM? is the 4 FotM and 3 vanilla minor improvements like the rulebook suggests ok? Anything I should house rule? I've played quite a lot of vanilla, one player has played a lot of vanilla also, one complete newbie and one player who has played 2 vanilla games. I have not encountered any broken card combos in farmers of the moor, but of course I have not played them all. Be prepared to have more resources than you are typically used to, if your scores aern't generally higher with the expansion than without you are playing wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
Dre2Dee2 posted:EDIT: holy poo poo, they are even retheming Loopin' Louie with a new Loopin' Chewie haha are you making this up? i hope to loving god you aren't making this up. i will pay money for loopin' chewie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
Broken Loose posted:There's 1 great Star Wars movie, 1 good Star Wars movie, and then like 5 or 6 lovely ones. The vast majority of Star Wars is bad. Broken Loose posted:are you making this up? i hope to loving god you aren't making this up. i will pay money for loopin' chewie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
that changes nothing. it could be jar-jar's high flyin' adventure and i would buy it. i would payy money for edward cullen rides snoopy's doghose as a retheme of loopin' louie. it could be kathryn loving janeway spinning a delta flier over a coffee nebula and i would hover nervously over the kickstarter page waiting for it to go live so i can waste my precious currency on it. if there's any game i'd forgive a wall of monopoly-style rethemes for, it'd be loopin' louie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
Broken Loose posted:kathryn loving janeway spinning a delta flier over a coffee nebula I would buy that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
YO, BOARDGOONS AT GENCON: I am running demos of FINAL ATTACK! at random intervals through the convention. I have an updated PNP set from Broken Loose. Next run will probably be 6 or 7PM EST tomorrow If you are interested, please PM me or hit me up on the GenCon GroupMe or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
Broken Loose posted:are you making this up? i hope to loving god you aren't making this up. i will pay money for loopin' chewie. I can verify - there's a display with a sign for it in our front hallway
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
If 3-4 player game market is "over saturated" could someone tell me some games that are good with exactly 3 players? I don't mean "well this is a good game that can support 3", I mean one that is actually made for 3 and plays well with 3.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Wasn't Dominion primarily designed to be a 3 player game? Also, which is the game where two players are against each other, and the third is allied with one or the other depending on the side of the board.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
Churchill?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 03:08
|
|
|
AbortRetryFail posted:If 3-4 player game market is "over saturated" could someone tell me some games that are good with exactly 3 players? One of Maria and Friedrich is designed to be 3, 3 Kingdoms Redux, some card games (Haggis, Chimera), the new wargame Churchill, but a whole lot of 2-4 games are great with 3 (agricola and other worker placements, Castles of Burgundy, Deus).
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
IMO Galaxy Trucker peaks at 3.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
AbortRetryFail posted:If 3-4 player game market is "over saturated" could someone tell me some games that are good with exactly 3 players? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDt9AyKONvk
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Churchill? silvergoose posted:One of Maria and Friedrich is designed to be 3, 3 Kingdoms Redux, some card games (Haggis, Chimera), the new wargame Churchill, but a whole lot of 2-4 games are great with 3 (agricola and other worker placements, Castles of Burgundy, Deus). This is the one I was thinking of.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Forbidden Stars at Amazon (USA) for $65 for some reason, fulfilled by Amazon so it's not even some random seller: http://www.amazon.com/Fantasy-Flight-Games-FS01-Forbidden/dp/1616617772/ref=pd_sim_14_78?ie=UTF8&refRID=0TB2J1QGGV42TEY8P6Z1 I'd nab a copy but doesn't ship to Canada. Come to think of it, for all I know that's a decent price in the USA 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
Btw exploding kittens kickstarter sent an update saying well when we started we said eta July but that was when we thought we'd sell 500 but since then (big list of unexpected things) sooooo the completion date is.... still July. Actually we're shipping right now. Cheers  I thought it was kind of funny.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 04:38
|
|
|
Well thank goodness Exploding Kittens is shipping on time!
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
That makes sense. It's easy to make bad things.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 04:52
|
|
|
Marketing is the thing they're actually selling anyway so yeah, makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:That makes sense. It's easy to make bad things. Indeed, just look at this thread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
At least they didn't experience any delays in shipping out their reskinned poker decks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:Btw exploding kittens kickstarter sent an update saying well when we started we said eta July but that was when we thought we'd sell 500 but since then (big list of unexpected things) sooooo the completion date is.... still July. Actually we're shipping right now. Cheers So I guess you kickstarted exploding kittens, cool cool
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
Yeah, I got Forbidden Stars from Amazon for like $90, including shipping, which is a good deal better than the $170 it goes for on retail here. For once, I managed to beat the system! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 05:33
|
|
|
Sometimes I'm mystified by the reactions I get to things in this thread but I guess I should have seen that one coming.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:Sometimes I'm mystified by the reactions I get to things in this thread but I guess I should have seen that one coming. Well, uh, let us know how it is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
I'm going to be building a wargaming table that will be 6'x4' playable area. I also am going to want to use it for board games and poker (once). What would you want in a good board gaming table? Surface features, edging, what? So far I plan on having a felt surface with a slightly raised lip, making sure that the lip doesn't have a sharp corner at the top. How tall a lip is too tall? How do I convince people that cupholders aren't necessary? Etc
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
Lorini posted:I'm not sure that (assuming you like strategy games) you can tell if you are doing well from the start, as those type of games are generally considered games with runaway leaders, and most people don't want to play them. One of the things I like about Dominant Species for example, is that you need to understand the board to actually figure out who is really winning, as points alone won't tell you. I consider that a great strength of the game. Also the attraction of many worker placement games is that they have enough depth to them for repeat play to see if you can figure out earlier what's actually going on. And Argent is a great example of this as well, you won't know who is actually winning (although you can tell if someone is losing if they have little of anything) until the game is over.....I'm not sure why, if you need to know whether or not you are winning early-mid game, you would choose Argent, as its basically the antithesis of this. Coming back to this now that I'm no longer relegated to phoneposting, I think to me the ability to see whether someone is winning in the early or mid-game is, to some degree, a useful feedback mechanism for helping inform your actions going forward. To take Kemet again, as it's been my go-to for "quality board gaming" lately, Kemet has enough "give" in things that you can't really say for 100% certainty who's going to win until the endgame is just about upon you since points can shift back and forth and a cleverly played round can see someone gain multiple points in succession to surge forward...but nonetheless you do still get to see that if, say, one person has 5 VP and you only have 2 that whatever you've been doing up until that point hasn't been working out as well, maybe it's time to shift gears. With the game of Stone Age I played I was essentially clueless throughout most of the game if what I'd settled on trying (technology cards and tools with tool-based points multipliers) was doing me any good or not. Did I need to diversify more? Into what? Who should I have been placing my workers to block, and on which spaces? Or would I have been better served just focusing on my own stuff instead? I wouldn't say that it was a frustrating experience for me, because it wasn't, but I also didn't feel quite as connected to the proceedings as I otherwise might. There was no "oh man I have the perfect strategy and everything's falling into place," it was more just "well I guess we'll find out at the end if this was smart or dumb." Hearing that Argent promotes a more flexible approach makes me optimistic about it, and from tutorial videos I've watched it seems a bit more "dynamic" than other worker placement games what with the variable approaches and strategies that different worker types, spells, etc. allow you to employ (blasting people out of spaces, locking rooms down with volcanoes or glaciers, slipping into a shadow-dimension to double up on spaces, etc). Hopefully I'll have a successful trip report next week.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
Are you sure your issue here isn't just to do with Stone Age's hidden trackable information? A lot of the points come from culture symbols and the game should let you see how people are doing on that front but doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 06:10
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:Are you sure your issue here isn't just to do with Stone Age's hidden trackable information? A lot of the points come from culture symbols and the game should let you see how people are doing on that front but doesn't. If "hidden trackable information" means what I think it does then yeah, that's probably part of it. I'm actually not even sure whether it's permitted to ask someone in Stone Age how many points they're at or not, I didn't think to check, but even if it is I can't imagine that it would enhance peoples' fun for someone to be constantly punching figures into a calculator.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 06:21
|
|
|
signalnoise posted:What would you want in a good board gaming table? Surface features, edging, what? Do you have a cat? Y/N Our game table used to be an old pool table. It was fine as far as reaching things and arm-resting comfort went. So you could certainly do worse than aim for "pool table or less" in terms of rise, shape & size of raised border, etc. The very obvious border also had a side effect of making an extremely clear border between out-side and in-side (game side) and not an appropriate place for e.g. drinks. Side tables did that job. My current table is an abomination with like sharp 4+ inch sides. But the depth isn't really an issue like I thought it would be. Turns out it is pretty easy to reach DOWN to game pieces and not at all troublesome. It's an awful table but not because of the depth.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
I do have a cat
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
Nevermore is my game of the con after day 1. Simple yet can be deep.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 06:53
|
|
|
Played Smallworld and Quantum tonight. I actually enjoyed Smallworld, though it's not a brilliant game. It's light enough to talk super-casual gamers into (the alternatives that I avoided were Munchkin and Chez Geek - of the three, I feel quite confident in choosing Smallworld!), and it manages to lay out a broad civilization-esque narrative. It's no Eclipse, but I'd be happy to play it again in the future. Quantum is a tighter, more solid experience, but lacks the narrative hooks for imagination that Smallworld provides. Or, to put it more simply, Quantum is drier than Smallworld. Definitely a more mechanically interesting game though. The upgrade cards don't even seem remotely balanced and I'm not a fan of the reconfigure mechanic being a die roll (it feels out of place, both thematically and to a lesser extent mechanically), but I'd still be happy to play Quantum again in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 08:22
|
|
|
I see Smallworld as a pretty good gateway game to get non-strategy gamers into them. It doesn't have the "spend two hours building a machine/empire then watch someone stomp on it" aspect many strategy games have since if you get beaten up you can still affect the game - in fact, getting wiped off the map lets you affect the board more than someone whose forces are all tied down holding territory.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 08:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
Mr.Trifecta posted:Nevermore is my game of the con after day 1. Simple yet can be deep. a cheap take that card game is your game of the con? Edit: I could have saved you so much money going to 'the con' man: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpkcPAjhLT0 4outof5 fucked around with this message at 09:12 on Jul 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 09:02
|
|
