|
So...the 18xx series...is this literally an entire genre of games dedicated to train companies? I don't understand how there's like 56 of these titles. I just don't. It is literally very confusing to me. Edit: I think it may just be the fact that someone says "this game has trains and takes place in the 19th century...let's slap the 18xx moniker on there I guess" every single time. Morpheus fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Feb 10, 2016 |
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:00 |
|
|
Morpheus posted:So...the 18xx series...is this literally an entire genre of games dedicated to train companies? I don't understand how there's like 56 of these titles. I just don't. It is literally very confusing to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
18XX games are the mobas of board games
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:CAn any vets of the 18xx scene give me some pointers? My copy of 1830 is coming in today and I have a few questions: As Tekopo said 1846 is coming out. I'm a bit torn on whether I want it since it seems to veer into the eurogame economic snowball side of things which I'm not very interested in. However I don't want to write it off without playing it and I have a friend who doesn't like 18xx because he can't get his head around just trying to make money instead of treating a company like a puppy. Funnily enough he can grasp that in Acquire. I wonder if he spends too much time grappling with the rules to see the implications of them, even though I've explained things to him. For a cheat sheet I'm pretty sure I used a copy of this although it looks like there are a couple of errors in it. I also recommend checking out the original Avalon Hill rules since the Mayfair ones are a bit overblown and they teach you the stupid new rules and then have an addendum for the classic game that everyone actually plays. The Mayfair rulebook is really pretty absurd. For poker chips I just use dice chips like these and an aluminum case. I also have a couple of acrylic chip trays so we can keep the bank split up around the table. That way people can handle their own payments. A better solution would be one of those nice wood cases that have removable chip trays. I have a 300 chip set in seven colors, fifty each of 1, 5, 10, 20, and 50 and then 25 of 100 and 500. I wish I had a few less 5s and 50s and more 100s which I might remedy by picking up another sleeve of the color I use for 100s. They're not going to blow you away with quality but they stack pretty well, they're easy to handle, and they cost me less than $50 total when I bought them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
COOL CORN posted:I just got a Broken Token Mage Knight organizer in the mail today. It's... Wow, pictures don't do it justice. Yeah, it's quality. And it knocks setup time down so much, you'll be playing Mage Knight every night when you get home from work!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
CaptainRightful posted:Yeah, it's quality. And it knocks setup time down so much, you'll be playing Mage Knight every night when you get home from work! I just put mine together last night? Did you guys use glue? I ended up gluing most of the pieces to be safe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Lump Shaker posted:I just put mine together last night? Did you guys use glue? I ended up gluing most of the pieces to be safe. I didn't because I put it together on my lunch break at work. I might put a few drops of glue later though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
Sentinels of the Multiverse KS is over half a million. :badtasteingames:
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Lump Shaker posted:I just put mine together last night? Did you guys use glue? I ended up gluing most of the pieces to be safe. I haven't bothered with glue for mine and they seem to hold up just fine without, especially if they're pretty full of cards and junk. COOL CORN posted:I just got a Broken Token Mage Knight organizer in the mail today. It's... Wow, pictures don't do it justice. Yeah when you see a picture or even when you first get it, its like "welp here's some laser cut balsa wood or whatever" But then when you actually get it all together and fit snug in the box, its like drat that's professional looking. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:Yeah when you see a picture or even when you first get it, its like "welp here's some laser cut balsa wood or whatever" Yeah that's what I thought! But this is serious sturdy wood that fits together so snugly it literally squeaks
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
cenotaph posted:Don't play 1830 with two. If people aren't aware, Francis Tresham created 1829, the first 18xx, starting a tradition of horribly named games. He also created 1830 but got kind of annoyed at how people played it, so he created 1853 as almost a 'gently caress you' to people that wanted to play the market rather than run super sweet train companies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
We've played 1862 and it's been fine with two, noting it's by the same guy (Mike Hutton) who did 1860.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
For 18XX games that you can get your hands one right now: 1844/1854 is supposed to come out this year, 1853, and 1830. 1856, 1860, and 1870 all had commercial releases in the last few decades so there may be copies collecting dust at game/hobby stores near you. You could also get lucky and find cheap ones on the BGG market place. Otherwise be prepared to pay a lot. The BGG marketplace usually has non insane prices like Amazon resellers. There is also Golden Spike Games and All Aboard Games who will charge an arm and a leg but will get you a game in a month or so. Lastly there is Deep Thought Games where you need to leave your order in your will. Maybe your grandkids will get to play. If you feel confident you can always make a print and play version of some games. Edit: have you played 1889 yet, Tekepo? That game seems like a good candidate to teach the 1830 branch. Durendal fucked around with this message at 21:54 on Feb 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Just as a warning: 1854 is bad, like really bad, 1844 I like but it has a lot of fiddly rules, 1853 is not really an 18xx at all and not a good start, 1830 is a good starter game (and the most famous 18xx) and relatively easy to find, although the Mayfair version has a lot of lovely garbage alt rules and the rule book is badly written, 1860 is decent and I have a copy of it for sale and 1870 is a long game but I like if a lot. 1856 is also pretty good but hard to find, but has a lot of fiddly rules. I have played 1889 and it is pretty much 1830-lite, I like it. 18MEX is decent but good luck finding a copy. 18AL maybe? 18Neb is also the premier 3P game for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Just as a warning: 1854 is bad, like really bad, 1844 I like but it has a lot of fiddly rules, 1853 is not really an 18xx at all and not a good start, 1830 is a good starter game (and the most famous 18xx) and relatively easy to find, although the Mayfair version has a lot of lovely garbage alt rules and the rule book is badly written, 1860 is decent and I have a copy of it for sale and 1870 is a long game but I like if a lot. 1856 is also pretty good but hard to find, but has a lot of fiddly rules. It looks like the new versions of 1844/1854 aren't going to be direct reprints. Maybe they cleaned them up? What is so dire about 1854?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
One section of the board has a little sub board which is completely loving pointless and in the end just advantages one player and it's really loving pointless and contrived. It uses an hexagonal market for ~reasons~. I think one of the members of my old 18xx groups made a more thorough review. Basically if I want an Austria game, I'd rathe include Hungary and play the better 1824.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
That's too bad, hopefully they fixed it or made it more interesting. I think the only copy of 1824 I've seen floating around was one from China for $300.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
Durendal posted:That's too bad, hopefully they fixed it or made it more interesting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
All this talk about 18xx has me considering grabbing a copy of 1830 from my local place. Is this something that you'd need a serious group to sink four hours into learning/playing? Also, the store website points out that: quote:The 2011 version of 1830 was published by Mayfair Games in partnership with Lookout Games of Germany. This publication was developed under license from Francis Tresham in co-operation with Bruce Shelley (the original 1830 developer). This version contains rules and components for Francis Tresham's original classic design, a faster-playing basic game, and new variants from some of the world's best railroad game developers. Does this mean they cleaned up or offer an alternative the rules problem that Tekopo was referencing? Christ, I just bought FCM...
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
All the variants are bad and the quick game is also bad, yeah. I want to like th Mayfair version ( I own it) but Christ they hosed it up. It's still worth getting if you literally ignore all the changes they made.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:1856 is also pretty good but hard to find, but has a lot of fiddly rules. I want to play 1881, instead of making a map of Ontarios rail system using a variety of different hex tiles, you make the Canadian transcontinental by just drawing a straight line across a map of Canada. The person who has embezzled the most money by the end of the game is the winner 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
As a wargamer who is irrationally drawn to small-print-run games from obscure companies, I... really want to try an 18xx.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
The rules problem is actually caused by the faster-playing basic game rules and teh variants. Just ignore those and play classic 1830 is the advice i'm getting/giving.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
The funny thing about 1856 is that the winning strategy is to have an unsustainable company, running it into the ground and then have it merge into the national railway before it goes bankrupt, and then use the money you made running it into the ground to fund an actually viable company.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:The funny thing about 1856 is that the winning strategy is to have an unsustainable company, running it into the ground and then have it merge into the national railway before it goes bankrupt, and then use the money you made running it into the ground to fund an actually viable company. This sounds like an accurate representation of Canadian "capitalism".
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:1846 is in a the tresham side of the family and it is firmly in the "run a company well" field rather than having many market shenanigans. It is still pretty cutthroat: you can absolutely gently caress over other people if you gently caress up their tracks/token them out. It has a fair bit variability as well. Heh, somehow I forgot to say "and it might be a good game to play with him" in that post you quoted. I can probably flip it if I don't like it. It's funny that Tresham wound up feeling that way. Here's a quote from an article about the development of 1830 in The General: quote:Francis and I also found we had a different idea of how the game should play. I was looking for more of the measured pace of 1829 where the game progressed through a slow evolution of stages. Francis wanted to intentionally do something different from 1829 (he did not consider his second version of 1829 as successful as the first), and he wanted to capture some of the wide open free-for- all entrepreneurship that embodied the building of American railroads. I guess he got what he wanted and then some. The article is pretty interesting. It mentions some early problems, like the stock market being disproportionately rewarding compared to dividends and privates were allowed to be sold for up to 10 times (!) their face value. It's from Volume 23i6 available here if anyone wants to read it. Durendal posted:That's too bad, hopefully they fixed it or made it more interesting. Also if anyone winds up liking 18xx games I would not recommend looking at the designers profiles on BGG. Mike Hutton rates Cosmic Encounter a 10. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
I posted earlier, but didn't get an answer: how does Spyrium compare to other worker placement games? I've gotten a few games in at this point, and like it a lot, but it's my first WP game, so I don't have a frame of comparison.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_L18XX_games Holy poo poo
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Yep.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
sector_corrector posted:I posted earlier, but didn't get an answer: how does Spyrium compare to other worker placement games? I've gotten a few games in at this point, and like it a lot, but it's my first WP game, so I don't have a frame of comparison. It's lighter and plays super quick compared to Caylus or Agricola. You also don't really have an upkeep to worry about in Spyrium. You do learn some important things like engine building, and how to value certain spots in all the different currencies you need to worry about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Relax. They are bound to run out of century eventually.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
That's missing a bunch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Relax. They are bound to run out of century eventually. Good news! A lot of games are now using a location based naming convention e.g. 18EU or 18MEX 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:All the variants are bad and the quick game is also bad, yeah. I want to like th Mayfair version ( I own it) but Christ they hosed it up. It's still worth getting if you literally ignore all the changes they made. So the "rules and components" from the classic design are not in fact the original ones? This is... confusing
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Not even all of them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
Durendal posted:Good news! A lot of games are now using a location based naming convention e.g. 18EU or 18MEX I think the classic rules are in the Mayfair version, I would need to check.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:So the "rules and components" from the classic design are not in fact the original ones? This is... confusing It has all the classic stuff, but also has a ton of extra junk. The rule book sucks in that it teaches you the "base game" then has a tiny section later detailing all the changes you need to make in order to play the superior "classic game".
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
Durendal posted:It has all the classic stuff, but also has a ton of extra junk. The rule book sucks in that it teaches you the "base game" then has a tiny section later detailing all the changes you need to make in order to play the superior "classic game". I just posted this, complete with a link to the original rules. edit: that sounds kind of pissy, I just meant people can scroll up if they want the leaner rulebook. cenotaph fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Feb 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
cenotaph posted:I just posted this, complete with a link to the original rules. Yup. You should reread Cenotaph's post, Fulsom.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:00 |
|
|
COOL CORN posted:I just got a Broken Token Mage Knight organizer in the mail today. It's... Wow, pictures don't do it justice. I'm trying to resist purchasing this! You're chipping away at my resolve. My Plano box is fine.... just fine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:56
|
|
