|
Medium Style posted:Some great suggestions, thanks everyone. Concordia and Scoville both look like good options that weren't on my radar at all. Less than an hour probably. The short objectives are very short, as an example a 3-player end game condition is 4 ports, and everyone usually builds at least one port, so it can end very quickly. Two player plays a bit differently though so i can't 100% say for sure.
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 20:05 |
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:Game designer wins the lottery. "What will you do with all that cash?" "Oh, keep making games until it runs out." <laughter> That happened, you know. A guy got $5M from Broadcom as an early investor, used it to start a publishing company, Uber, and lost it all. He was about five years too early.......
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:Oh and of course if you don't have it just get Dominion and all the expansions. While a great game suggestion, this really breaks the "hard to know when way behind" rule. In a 2-player game it's trivial to count exact score in most boards and estimate it in the rest. In multiplayer I don't try that hard and often lose track but in 2-player I know that I have 3 provinces, there are 3 left, so my opponent must have 2, etc. Jaipur might work for you but again I'm not sure if the scoring is hidden enough. When you get bonus tiles their values are secret, but regular points are all public. Feels unlikely somebody will get a huge advantage though, and you're probably wanting something more complex.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
In case any of you missed this, Knizia's Medici is getting a reprint next year: https://www.boardgamegeek.com/blogpost/45932 Also, Ra was hinted at being reprinted by TMG in Twitter a little while ago: https://twitter.com/TastyMinstrel/status/631291591932575745 It would be cool if these were back in circulation, there is a shameful lack of auctions/classic Knizia games actually in print
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
Medium Style posted:Some great suggestions, thanks everyone. Concordia and Scoville both look like good options that weren't on my radar at all. Agricola: All Creatures Big and Small is solid. There is no hidden scoring though. I know these aren't Euro'y, but Jaipur and Biblios are both excellent and each has the hidden score thing going on until the very end. Jaipur doesn't allow for much planning, but Biblios has two phases where one phase is almost entirely preparing for the second.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Lorini posted:That happened, you know. A guy got $5M from Broadcom as an early investor, used it to start a publishing company, Uber, and lost it all. He was about five years too early....... Ouch. That's awful 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Medium Style posted:How long does a two-player game of Archipelago take? As little as 30 minutes. Forcing the game end can be quite easy, although avoiding revolution can be hard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
Jedit posted:As little as 30 minutes. Forcing the game end can be quite easy, although avoiding revolution can be hard. if I remember correctly I think one of the long-game end conditions is a relatively small amount of ships on the board, and the game ended very quick from what we were expecting
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
I just did some research and ordered Concordia, then threw in both Jaipur and Biblios too because I like small games. Thanks again. I never would have looked at Concordia or Biblios if not for this thread, the boxes for both are unappealing but the games inside look great. I'm especially excited about Biblios.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
Concordia's box is loving huge but flat.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
Jaipur is me and my girlfriend's game of choice when we go to the coffee house on the weekends. Fits on the table easily and we can knock out at least 2 or 3 games (of 3 rounds each) before we've finished our drinks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
^^^ a lot of games like Jaipur on here Pretty cool geeklist of "German" card games: https://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/197080/german-card-fillers/page/1 I have a soft spot for these games and often like them as much or more than the "main event" in many cases but they often don't get the same buzz as the board games. I have a bunch from this list but there are many I have never even heard of.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
Lots of good games on that geeklist. For Sale, Meuterer, Bottle Imp, Biblios, Bohnanza, Linko, No Thanks! are all very solid.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Why wouldn't you want to emulate them? If your goal is selling games, you have to give the people what they want. This is my #1 frustration when talking about game design on the net. There's a huge contingent of people who will talk about what 'good' design constitutes but the minute you say something popular is 'bad' they have a fainting fit because their underlying belief is actually that 'good' = made a lot of money. I don't know whether this is totally unexamined or just a thing everyone knows but doesn't want to address. Mister Sinewave posted:If it's so easy to poo poo out a million dollar kickstarter is the reason every other poster here isn't doing it come down to artistic and professional integrity? Because doing that is still a lot of work. It's just not work that involves making a good game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
Andarel posted:Lots of good games on that geeklist. I have *takes a deep breath* For Sale, Meuterer, Bottle Imp, Biblios, Bohnanza, Linko, No Thanks, Frank's Zoo, Tichu, Chimera, Haggis, Pairs, Arboretum, Piñata, Parade, Divinare, Sticheln, Lost Cities, Battle Line, 6 Nimmt, Potato Man, Coloretto, Red7, Falling, Kakerlaken Royal, Morels, Jaipur, Trambahn What's great is since they are easy to teach and play, I've actually played all of this poo poo, usually a bunch of times, and they are all pretty good. Being able to jam a game into a lunch break goes a long ways I still want to try Kmher, Odin's Ravens, Mamma Mia, a Mystery Rummy game, Scharfe Shoten, and Court of the Medici
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
Medium Style posted:It wasn't mentioned, but would Agricola: All Creatures Big and Small be a good fit? You definitely make plans and build towards something, but there's no hidden goals or end game bonuses. By choosing different buildings, though, players can work towards different end game bonuses than each other. Buying one or both of the building expansions will increase the variety of these optional end game bonuses. Even though it doesn't fit your bill perfectly, I would recommend it. You could also look at one of Rosenberg's recent designs, Fields of Arle. I haven't played it, but I've read some good things about it. It's also designed specifically for two player. Three other excellent lighter 2player games are Hive, Jaipur, and Lost Cities (the card game).
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
Having played a lot of Ascension against the AIs, I have to say it's a pretty poorly designed game overall. However, it definitely has the illusion of being deep. There are a number of 'combos', and buying towards those makes you feel like you're doing something. There are factions, complicated mechanics, a large variety of card types. Overall the randomness makes it hard to actually act on any of these strategies deeply. If you play with enough expansions, then you're sifting through a deck that's well into the hundreds, and therefore it's impossible for you to ever accurately build or action combos. There seem to be a number of core heuristics, and I can beat the expert computer fairly reliably at this point, but a lot of the time it feels like I may as well just be rolling dice and seeing what happens. In fact, I would say that Ascension has a lot of the same appeal as Talisman in terms of: random dopamine generator with a slight amount of control. Still, it's a good time killer for a cheap little laptop game. I can't imagine that it'd be worth sitting through physical games, which are going to expand gameplay considerably through rules clarification, shuffling, and action paralysis in the face of the illusion of choice. If anything, playing Ascension has made me appreciate how tight and well designed Dominion is in comparison.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
Played two new games today. Splendor: Really easy to learn, pretty fun to play, and and pretty fast. Really clean design, a nice blend of several concepts without getting too complex. I was surprised I didn't know about this, then found out it came out last year . Codenames: Pretty cool. We didn't play with the timer, but it seems like it'd probably be needed at some point to keep things moving. Will need to try it with other numbers, but definitely seems like it could be enjoyed with any group (as long as it's even).
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
I just played Zhanguo for the first time and my head still hurts. So many mechanics, so much point salad. It didn't help that the guy who taught it to us had only played it once, yet he still got exasperated when we didn't grasp every single rule the first time he explained them. Then we played Codenames a few times and I got screwed by needing "bank", "figure", and "row", with "check" as the assassin. The best I could come up with was "columns 3".
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 06:33
|
|
|
CaptainRightful posted:Then we played Codenames a few times and I got screwed by needing "bank", "figure", and "row", with "check" as the assassin. The best I could come up with was "columns 3". River 2 would get bank and row. Olympics 3 might get all 3 as a long shot (Rowing, Figure Skating, and both luge or hockey feature "banking"). When you hit those word clusters that point to the assassin, you need to start racking your brain for alternate definitions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 07:01
|
|
|
Had to link "carrot" and "Atlantis" last night for a win so I went with "under 2", and the other codemaster whispered to me, "drat you!" Felt good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 14:23
|
|
|
CaptainRightful posted:I just played Zhanguo for the first time and my head still hurts. So many mechanics, so much point salad. It didn't help that the guy who taught it to us had only played it once, yet he still got exasperated when we didn't grasp every single rule the first time he explained them. Depending on your group, you might be able to use Charon: 3
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 14:30
|
|
|
The best link I've had so far has been using "Ticker 2" to link Clock and Organ for the win.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
Medium Style posted:It wasn't mentioned, but would Agricola: All Creatures Big and Small be a good fit? ACBaS is one of my and my wife's favorites. She likes it a ton but hates full Agricola. If you like King Ludwig you might like Suburbia. Same guy, same basic idea, but I picked it over Ludwig because people said it works better with two. We've played it 2-3 times and it's always been a good time (if a bit longer, at least an hour for us each time). Jaipur was kind of a flop for both of us, unfortunately. She adores Lost Cities and I have Battleline in the back of my mind for the next time we get bored.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:This is my #1 frustration when talking about game design on the net. There's a huge contingent of people who will talk about what 'good' design constitutes but the minute you say something popular is 'bad' they have a fainting fit because their underlying belief is actually that 'good' = made a lot of money. I never said that, "good" is entirely subjective, there is no platonic ideal of a good board game. Total sales of a game is however not subjective, it is a much better metric to gauge the attitudes of the general public.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 14:56
|
|
|
It is funny just how many industries people get into to 'make money' where there is basically no chance of it. Board games is one of them. If you want to make games to increase the amount of mirth in the universe or to express your creativity and vision, then go for it. If you are trying to make money, go get a finance degree, open a fast food franchise, learn to program, or just fall in front the next luxury car you see and sue their insurer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 15:04
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:there is no platonic ideal of a good board game I thought you liked Agricola
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 15:14
|
|
|
homullus posted:I thought you liked Agricola he said good board game
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
Huxley posted:ACBaS is one of my and my wife's favorites. She likes it a ton but hates full Agricola. If you like King Ludwig you might like Suburbia. Same guy, same basic idea, but I picked it over Ludwig because people said it works better with two. We've played it 2-3 times and it's always been a good time (if a bit longer, at least an hour for us each time). My wife loves King Ludwig but didn't like Suburbia nearly as much. It's because of the hidden scoring thing I mentioned. If you are way behind on the score track in Ludwig, you can still come from behind with a handful of secret objective cards and some 2nd place wins on the public objectives. It happens all the time. The objectives in Suburbia are easier to calculate at a glance, they are all-or-nothing, and there are fewer of them, so it's easier to tell if you have no chance of winning. I ranted about it in this thread a few weeks ago. Scoring doesn't have to be completely hidden, just "obscured". For example, 7 Wonders is a winner; even though there's no hidden scoring, there's also no track saying "you're only half way through the game and look how far behind you are". There's enough going on that it's not clear who is winning until you stop and add everything up at the end. Agricola was like that, I imagine ACBaS is the same.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 15:38
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:Depending on your group, you might be able to use Charon: 3 They were relative strangers. So I was pleased that a bunch of nerds got "belt", "bar", and "beach" from "weightlifting 3".
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
S.J. posted:he said good board game I'll fight you, come at me bro. Rutibex fucked around with this message at 16:19 on Sep 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:11
|
|
|
Medium Style posted:My wife loves King Ludwig but didn't like Suburbia nearly as much. It's because of the hidden scoring thing I mentioned. If you are way behind on the score track in Ludwig, you can still come from behind with a handful of secret objective cards and some 2nd place wins on the public objectives. It happens all the time. The objectives in Suburbia are easier to calculate at a glance, they are all-or-nothing, and there are fewer of them, so it's easier to tell if you have no chance of winning. I ranted about it in this thread a few weeks ago. Fields of Arle which was already mentioned is probably a better next step from 'gric, unless you just want a lighter faster game, also has this. Scoring isn't hidden but there's lots of stuff to add up at the end and way to score but it's very well balanced and it's just straight up hard to do bad, it's a game of plenty. It's hard to feel behind when you have over a dozen animals on your farm and are shipping stuff and making fabrics and building buildings, so even if you are technically behind you won't know and it certainly doesn't feel like you are. The last time I played I thought I was doing great and was way ahead, but in the end my wife beat me by a few points even though it felt to me like I was doing better. It's a great game and there's lots of strategies to explore. Troyes was also a good suggestion, it uses score tokens that players take and keep secret when they score points instead of moving up a track, so you never really know where everyone is, along with hidden end game scoring. Problem is it will be hard to find. If you're not opposed to another farming game, La Granja also uses this method of score keeping and is just a really nice mid-weight euro. It doesn't play anything like Rosenburg's games so there's no worry about it being redundant. If you like the card play from 'gric, you'll like it in this one probably as each card can be used for multiple things, you can get some really good engines and combos going. Also good choice with Concordia, it's a really good game. EBag fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Sep 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
I was pretty proud of CLERIC:2 for SPELL and CROSS the other day.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
Magnetic North posted:It is funny just how many industries people get into to 'make money' where there is basically no chance of it. Board games is one of them. If you want to make games to increase the amount of mirth in the universe or to express your creativity and vision, then go for it. If you are trying to make money, go get a finance degree, open a fast food franchise, learn to program, or just fall in front the next luxury car you see and sue their insurer. You are right, money made is a rather crass metric, and likely has more to do with marketing and other capitalism factors rather than game quality. The best measure of a games quality to people, I think, is it's longevity. That's a little harder to measure for modern games. By this metric good games would be, Backgammon, Chess, Go, Mahjong, Poker, Dominoes, etc. I would love to see what people are playing 200 years from now, would Cosmic Encounter still be popular? I would bet good money that people are still playing the likes of Magic the Gathering (though I doubt there would be 200 more years of expansion sets). I could see something like Mage Knight or Agricola or Terra Mystica standing the test of time, though they might lose their theme. Thematic games like Betrayal and Arabian Nights would only be historical curiosities as the literary tastes change.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Thematic games like Betrayal and Arabian Nights would only be historical curiosities as the literary tastes change. One Thousand and One Nights was published in (English) 1706 
T-Bone fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Sep 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
Played a bunch of games over the weekend: Dead of Winter didn't seem as bad as people have made it out to be, though it's certainly lacking in any strategic elements, and it's easy to just get hosed into a point of no return. My dislike is mostly of the wildly imbalanced goal cards - like, there's a goal that's "Have X medicine in your hand", then there's another card that's "Have X+1 medicine in your hand." What's the point if you're not going to balance a drat thing? I was a traitor and had a goal of having six food cards in my hand, which I misread as just having six cards. So I tanked everyone on the last turn, from morale 5 to 0, and lost anyway. Also played Broom Service. The mechanics are interesting, but the fact that you can simply waste a turn frustrated me way too much for me to enjoy the game. I doubt I'll be playing it again. Also, my roommate decided on a whim to pick up Terra Mystica. Some unbalanced racial abilities aside, that's quite the fun game. Oh, and I finally got around to playing Mage Knight. Jesus, you guys weren't kidding about those rules. And it was the first print of the game, so the cards felt cheap as hell. But yeah, we stopped playing when we started getting frustrated at the rules for sieging a castle. I kind of like the game, but would need to sit down with the rules for an hour or so just to pore over them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Has anyone done a math trade on BGG before? Are they reliable? I've got a few things I wouldn't mind getting rid but I'm a bit hesitant with the sheer amount of games on the list.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:One Thousand and One Nights was published in (English) 1706 I'm sure if future people want a game based on it One Thousand and One Nights they will write it themselves, to appeal to the sensibilities of the day. When we read stuff like the greek/roman classics today, people don't rely on translations done in the 1800's, there are more modern translations that are easier to understand in contemporary language.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:Played a bunch of games over the weekend: Dead of Winter didn't seem as bad as people have made it out to be, though it's certainly lacking in any strategic elements, and it's easy to just get hosed into a point of no return. My dislike is mostly of the wildly imbalanced goal cards - like, there's a goal that's "Have X medicine in your hand", then there's another card that's "Have X+1 medicine in your hand." What's the point if you're not going to balance a drat thing? I was a traitor and had a goal of having six food cards in my hand, which I misread as just having six cards. So I tanked everyone on the last turn, from morale 5 to 0, and lost anyway. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpYEJx7PkWE Morpheus posted:Also, my roommate decided on a whim to pick up Terra Mystica. Some unbalanced racial abilities aside, that's quite the fun game. You'll find that the usefulness of the racial abilities can be quite dependent on the round bonuses as well as what races other players are playing. Your first few games you should feel free to pick whatever sounds interesting, but eventually you'll want to draft races because it's actually a pretty important part of the game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 20:05 |
|
|
Morpheus posted:Played a bunch of games over the weekend: Dead of Winter didn't seem as bad as people have made it out to be, though it's certainly lacking in any strategic elements, and it's easy to just get hosed into a point of no return. My dislike is mostly of the wildly imbalanced goal cards - like, there's a goal that's "Have X medicine in your hand", then there's another card that's "Have X+1 medicine in your hand." What's the point if you're not going to balance a drat thing? I was a traitor and had a goal of having six food cards in my hand, which I misread as just having six cards. So I tanked everyone on the last turn, from morale 5 to 0, and lost anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:55
|
|
