|
homullus posted:There's a difference between "you can do this ONLY AFTER you've done that" rules, which are hard, and "there will be additional, more powerful choices later for everyone, at a pre-arranged point. I'll address it, and those choices, when we get there." Bob can't acquire the too-powerful tile if it's not out on the table. My issue is that when the game is done like this, positioning yourself to get the too-powerful tile (whether via turn order + economy or some other game-related mysticism) when it comes out becomes the exact same as grabbing it early, but the other players don't even have the chance to know what it is you're about to swipe from them.
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 05:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 09:24 |
|
|
homullus posted:There's a difference between "you can do this ONLY AFTER you've done that" rules, which are hard, and "there will be additional, more powerful choices later for everyone, at a pre-arranged point. I'll address it, and those choices, when we get there." Bob can't acquire the too-powerful tile if it's not out on the table. I'd rather set the entire game up at the same time instead of setting up some of it and then setting other bits up later. "But what if you put the level 4 tiles out but flipped them" no, I want everything out, everything set up, and no additional loving around if I have to. I love Argent: the Consortium but I dearly, dearly dislike the sheer amount of "draw additional tableaus from the four different decks of cards every round" that transpires in that game. Kemet's setup is clean, elegant, and most of all it's simple. "Here are the tiles you can purchase" is objectively less steps to remember than "these are the tiles you can buy now, then after [CONDITION] you can buy these others but not before." Trust me, do you know how many times I've had to say "no, you can't start with a level 3 pyramid and two level 0's, you have two choices, two, not three, not a choice that I explicitly went out of my way to exclude, you have played this game before"? The less stuff people have to commit to their mental metastrategic flowcharts the better. And I'll be honest, someone who has trouble dealing with Kemet's front-loaded nature is still going to be adrift with 36 tiles up for grabs as opposed to 48. Gating level 4 tiles isn't really going to address the issue that yes, Kemet expects you to either spend some time with a handout or spend your first game learning how poo poo works.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
Trynant posted:Yes, Splotter Spellen wants people to enjoy their games. However, their games are pretty drat niche most of the time (no way in hell more than a quarter of the thread would enjoy Antiquity), but the people who play them love them. They even put that kind of disclaimer on their site. Thanks for the response guys, I wasn't trying to be a jerk about them. I'd love to try some of these games, but the Canadian pre-order price for FCM is 130 bux so I'm probably not going to get to check that out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
My LGS just picked up a copy of Mare Nostrum, the 2003 version, with the Mythology expansion. Worth trying to grab, or would I be better off looking for the new version?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
The new Kickstarter version is at least a year away but it sounds like that has a few quality of life improvements. Unless it is heavily discounted I wouldn't bother. Plenty of other games to play in the meantime.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
Played Heartland Trucking Co and it's a fun little starter in the $12 zone. The only problem is, depending on how you lay the cards out, there's heavy, sometimes irresovable blocking; if you and another player move between 3 or so tiles, it's near impossible for others to enter that region of the board. I lost the first game that way, and won the second game barely by buying upgrades. (I think I beat the "no upgrades!" guy by $3).
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 08:24
|
|
|
I'm starting to watch rahdo's reviews. ...Jen's not real is she? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 08:39
|
|
|
She is but she doesn't show up that often.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 08:43
|
|
|
Jen is real and actually plays in some reviews. One thing about Pandemic Legacy: I've finished it and it is not really possible to keep playing the game after you've finished the campaign. It's still worth getting it for the experience imo. Can't really explain why it is unplayable after the campaign is over without getting into spoilers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 08:45
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:I'm starting to watch rahdo's reviews. Watching Rahdo is a rollercoaster, especially when he backtracks his moves over and over again when you just want to see the game in action.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 08:46
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Jen is real and actually plays in some reviews. Last envelope is a matchbook.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 08:48
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:One thing about Pandemic Legacy: I've finished it and it is not really possible to keep playing the game after you've finished the campaign. It's still worth getting it for the experience imo. Can't really explain why it is unplayable after the campaign is over without getting into spoilers. Without spoilers, can you play "normal" Pandemic if you ignore all the poo poo you've done to the poor board?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 08:55
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Without spoilers, can you play "normal" Pandemic if you ignore all the poo poo you've done to the poor board?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 09:11
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Under one very specific situation, no, but yeah, you would be able to. I can't see much to it though, the attraction of legacy is that you actually get to play the game with the changes you made. The attraction being shutting up people in other forum that claim that you have to burn the board after December. Also I don't have base pandemic. Fat Samurai fucked around with this message at 09:19 on Nov 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 09:17
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Jen is real and actually plays in some reviews. Usually hidden information games. She was most recently in last week's livestream of Codenames.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 09:35
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:The attraction being shutting up people in other forum that claim that you have to burn the board after December.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 09:52
|
|
|
Plus, legacy has at least one connection to Santiago that's not in vanilla, so it's slightly easier.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 10:37
|
|
|
Interesting that Pandemic Legacy just ends in an unplayable state , since they have season 2 in the works and call this the first act.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 14:35
|
|
|
Archenteron posted:My LGS just picked up a copy of Mare Nostrum, the 2003 version, with the Mythology expansion. Worth trying to grab, or would I be better off looking for the new version? I like Mare Nostrum but I think at least part of it is nostalgia for me. I think the Kickstarter is supposed to be shipping by Christmas, so it might be worth waiting a month or two to pick it up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Interesting that Pandemic Legacy just ends in an unplayable state , since they have season 2 in the works and call this the first act. Yeah but Season 2, assuming it's played on the same board from Season 1, could be a shitload of stickers and stuff to change, recuperate, damage, or whatever. Also, it's a question of how you define 'unplayable'. Can't bring up spoilers (and even then I'm a little before halfway so who knows), but I'd like to see what constitutes this state for people that are worried about it. But gently caress it, already I've played this game more than I've played most games I've owned for years, so even if the game disintegrates when it's played the final game, I'm happy with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 15:16
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Interesting that Pandemic Legacy just ends in an unplayable state , since they have season 2 in the works and call this the first act. Can't assume everyone is going to play Season One to get to Season Two, so it'll be a complete set - maybe with a way to quick-setup a world that acts like it went through Season One? (thinking in terms of starting Season Two of Telltale Walking Dead and having them randomly generate "HERE'S HOW PEOPLE FEEL ABOUT YOU" stuff).
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 15:19
|
|
|
My wife loves Pandemic, she enjoyed Elder Sign. Overall, she really likes mid-complexity co-op games, after we tried Agricola (too ruthless but the theme was nice) and Crusoe (too much to learn and took way too long) - is there anything other than Flashpoint Fire Rescue that fits the bill?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
My wife hates Agricola but loves Agricola: All Creatures Big & Small. Similar theme and stil a pretty solid worker placement game without the feeding aspect from Agricola, plus the room tiles (with the expansion) from Caverna. At this point, I think I prefer it over Agricola as well. For other coops, maybe Legendary Alien, if she digs the theme.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
Escape: Curse of the Temple is a lot of fun, real-time dice chucker that plays in 10 minutes. I've heard mostly good things about Forbidden Desert as well, it's supposed to be really hard but not very complex.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:I'm starting to watch rahdo's reviews. Hahaha, I think everyone who watches rahdo regularly goes through this phase until you actually see her. With how manic Rahdo is it's totally believable that he's just had a total breakdown and has imagined himself a wife Southern Heel posted:My wife loves Pandemic, she enjoyed Elder Sign. Overall, she really likes mid-complexity co-op games, after we tried Agricola (too ruthless but the theme was nice) and Crusoe (too much to learn and took way too long) - is there anything other than Flashpoint Fire Rescue that fits the bill? Darkest Night/Eldritch Horror?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
It's not a Co-Op but Dominion hits all your other criteria. Also Space Alert is great with 4-5 if you and your wife have board game friends. Otherwise you could try Caverna, which is a nice mid-complexity version of Agricola that is much friendlier, if a bit looser in design IMHO.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
burger time posted:So, Orleans kickstarter came in today. Holy poo poo, these components are gorgeous. Excited to play the game now. And apparently, the co-op expansion that came out at Essen is really good. My copy arrived on Saturday as well. Just a week ago I told my wife to just have our kids give me the game as a birthday gift (which is two weeks away). As the sealed box sits in our closet I'm greatly regretting that statement now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:Yeah but Season 2, assuming it's played on the same board from Season 1, could be a shitload of stickers and stuff to change, recuperate, damage, or whatever. The game sort of has a limited lifespan as-is thanks to the panic level going up anyway, but I'm doing my assessment on stuff that happens later, which I can't really explain without spoiling the end of the game. I used to be in the 'you can just play the game with the changes once the campaign is over', but having finished the game I don't think this is totally true.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
So now that it's come back in stock in places, I've had a chance to play Codenames. Holy cow, what an ingenious design, and really fun too! I think it would be easier to teach, though, if you only had a 4X4 grid of words out at first, and put out the other cards later, once each team has correctly identified at least one friendly agent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
homullus posted:So now that it's come back in stock in places, I've had a chance to play Codenames. Holy cow, what an ingenious design, and really fun too! I think it would be easier to teach, though, if you only had a 4X4 grid of words out at first, and put out the other cards later, once each team has correctly identified at least one friendly agent. You really don't like front-loaded rules, do you?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
homullus posted:So now that it's come back in stock in places, I've had a chance to play Codenames. Holy cow, what an ingenious design, and really fun too! I think it would be easier to teach, though, if you only had a 4X4 grid of words out at first, and put out the other cards later, once each team has correctly identified at least one friendly agent. That is a bad idea that breaks down almost immediately once you analyse it. What if the clue you gave is a word added to the board? What if you give a two word clue, they miss one and another word that fits is added to the board? It's massively more complicated with your suggestion. edit: alright but its not much of a joke In other news, after kickstarting it so long ago I finally got Dungeon Lords to the table and that seems like a piece of strangely elegant design. I'd run through the rules a couple of times in the past by myself and even botched a quick demo game to see all the moving parts, but it didn't really click until about halfway through the first year and I started getting the hang of all the iconography. drat good game, although it feels like I have to understand so much more information than like, Caverna (one of the few other worker placements I've played) what with deciding what orders to hang onto (based on what other people are playing now and therefore will have next turn), where I'm likely to be on the evilometer when adventurers are dished out, when I can afford to get payday as the first event and when I can't, etc. It's a good level of thinking though, whereas - for example - Tash Kalar blows our group to pieces with AP. Single Tight Female fucked around with this message at 17:50 on Nov 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
Yay! I'm going to Dice Tower Con!
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
He's obviously trolling, come on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Single Tight Female posted:That is a bad idea that breaks down almost immediately once you analyse it. What if the clue you gave is a word added to the board? What if you give a two word clue, they miss one and another word that fits is added to the board? It's massively more complicated with your suggestion. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
homullus posted:So now that it's come back in stock in places, I've had a chance to play Codenames. Holy cow, what an ingenious design, and really fun too! I think it would be easier to teach, though, if you only had a 4X4 grid of words out at first, and put out the other cards later, once each team has correctly identified at least one friendly agent. This is just daft. It's genuinely making the game more complicated (see above) and simultaneously making it significantly harder and less fun. The game is about connections between words; when you drop from 25 to 16 words, there's going to be a corresponding order of magnitude drop (probably significantly more, tbh) in the number of connections. e: whoops. To be fair, your obtuseness over kemet just didn't end. The Supreme Court fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Nov 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
Played a couple rounds of Forbidden Stars. It wasn't supposed to be a couple of rounds, but I managed to sneak a quick win on turn 3 of the first game, so our host (my brother) who doesn't get to game very much (two daughters of ages 8 and 5 will do that to a guy) insisted on a mulligan. Which worked out for him, because he won the second game on turn 7. We played three players both times, and despite the way the objective system encourages you to attack everyone eventually, the basic imbalance of three player strategy games was still noticeable. In the first game, Chaos and the Orks got into it early, which let me, as the Marines, grab an easy objective on turn 2, and then the next two to win on turn 3 because the Orks had only left one unit of Boyz on one of them and Chaos only a single Cultist on the other. In the second game, using the same races with the same players, they both stuck one of my objectives in their home systems and fortified the hell out of them, and my own attempts to size the easier objectives failed due to some bad luck and poor play on my part. (I should have used all of my reinforcements one time, I forgot to use a useful Scheme card which cost me another battle, etc. etc. In my defense, it was past midnight at that point, and I ain't as young as I used to be.) By the time the game ended both Chaos and the Orks had mulched my armies and even though I was able to use my fleet to Exterminatus Chaos' invasion force and keep him from getting objective three, the Orks overwhelmed my defensive force to win the game. Which brings me to my question for the goons....are there any good three player strategic games? I mean, sure, games that don't involve much in the way of direct action against your opponents can work fine with any number of players. Most deckbuilders, for instance, don't change much if at all with three players. But are there any war/strategy games that support three players well? If so, how do they avoid the usually inevitable end results of 1) One player is ignored while the other two fight, and that one player almost certainly wins, or 2) Two players team up against the third, and that player almost certainly loses? jng2058 fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Nov 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
jng2058 posted:But are there any war/strategy games that support three players well? If so, how do they avoid the usually inevitable end results of 1) One player is ignored while the other two fight, and that one player almost certainly wins, or 2) Two players team up against the third, and that player almost certainly loses? It's on my mind as it was in the thread earlier, but Kemet works well, as the design encourages the players to attack each other pretty much equally (and constantly). Specifically, losses are easily mitigated, the map is modular so 3 players are forced into immediate conflict and aggression is incentivised by permanent victory points. The final turn can be a bit kingmak-ey, but the new victory condition (which doesn't need the expansion, as it's just a rules upgrade) should hopefully fix that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
The Supreme Court posted:This is just daft. It's genuinely making the game more complicated (see above) and simultaneously making it significantly harder and less fun. The game is about connections between words; when you drop from 25 to 16 words, there's going to be a corresponding order of magnitude drop (probably significantly more, tbh) in the number of connections. Just talking about connections between two words, there are 120 possible connections on a 4x4 and 325 on a 5x5, nearly 3 times as many.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
We actually did try micro-Codenames the other day. We had 5 minutes to kill (after playing Codenames, so it was already out), so we played 3x3 (the spymasters just had to scan a bit to find a card that had a corner with suitable colors). Works pretty good actually, and plays very fast.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 09:24 |
|
|
jng2058 posted:But are there any war/strategy games that support three players well? If so, how do they avoid the usually inevitable end results of 1) One player is ignored while the other two fight, and that one player almost certainly wins, or 2) Two players team up against the third, and that player almost certainly loses? I can't answer the questions but I've heard a lot of good buzz about 3 Kingdoms redux, it's specifically made to be played with 3. Also Churchill I think is made for 3 and a lot of goons seemed to think it was pretty great after it came out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2015 18:06
|
|