|
Hm, are there any TTA-esque games that are fun solo? Is Nations any good?
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 06:47 |
|
|
COOL CORN posted:Hm, are there any TTA-esque games that are fun solo? Is Nations any good? Historia, and no.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
Ryoshi posted:On an unrelated note I have a craving to buy Twilight Imperium and start up a yearly game day for it with some friends, someone talk me out of it before I drop another $70-99 on a game I'll rarely if ever get to actually play. Twilight Imperiums primary purpose isn't to actually be played, it's for displaying on a shelf for Crocodile Dundee style boardgame size competitions. "You think thats a boardgame? This is a boardgame!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Twilight Imperiums primary purpose isn't to actually be played, it's for displaying on a shelf for Crocodile Dundee style boardgame size competitions. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
All the wargamers feeling really smug about now 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Every once in a while I drink a bit too much and consider ordering this before getting scared off by the price tag.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Managing to go from +1 to +13 culture per turn in a single turn in new Through the Ages feels pretty good. It's all about those culture leaders.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Ryoshi posted:Every once in a while I drink a bit too much and consider ordering this before getting scared off by the price tag. Price tag, and not the thousands of hours of playtime for a single game?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Price tag, and not the thousands of hours of playtime for a single game? Feature, not a bug
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Twilight Imperiums primary purpose isn't to actually be played, it's for displaying on a shelf for Crocodile Dundee style boardgame size competitions. Same for all those non-D&D RPG books I have "Man, it'd be cool to run a game of that one day... yeah... one day..." 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Is that gonna fit on your new table?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
sonatinas posted:Is that gonna fit on your new table? lol nah Actually I hosed it up, most "large" wargames are 34" in height, and I built my table 32" in height  so I can't play World in Flames, Totaler Krieg, Eastern Theater of Ops, etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Historia, and no. This looks really good, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Rutibex, do you play games to have fun or just collect cardboard and plastic?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
Machai posted:Rutibex, do you play games to have fun or just collect cardboard and plastic? A little of both! Honestly, most of the games I own I can never find any opponents for, my boardgaming pals are all in another city  At most I can get a game of Fluxx or Magic in once in a while, but the people I know around here don't like hyper nerd poo poo. I do prefer games with solo options this reason, and play those quite a bit. I have a little table set up with a solo game on it at all times (usually Agricola).There is a bit of this: Dre2Dee2 posted:Same for all those non-D&D RPG books I have 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
COOL CORN posted:I watched all of Rahdo's Uwe videos, and now I really want Loyang, Merkator, and Glass Road. Caverna really is amazing. I had Agricola and held off because of the price and not really seeing any need for what looked like an Agricola variant when the base game was one of the best things I've ever played. A friend finally cracked and I'm glad he did. It takes off a lot of the pressure which sounds like a bad thing, but then gives you far more options and the time to see them pay off in a way Agricola doesn't. You're racing to succeed rather than racing to not starve to death. There's still competition obviously, but it's far, far less cutthroat and that changes the feel of the game in a significant enough way that it really feels fresh. It also has probably the best components of any game I've ever played except for maybe HeroQuest. It's definitely $100 worth of stuff. Absolutely worth it for a fan of Agricola.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
COOL CORN posted:Yeah please do! I probably won't be picking up a new game for another week or two anyway. T-Bone posted:Yeah there's a cheapish copy at my LGS, I'd be interested in a play report too. Trip report: Merkator is fun. It feels quite a bit like Loyang actually cause of the planning ahead. You really have to think a few turns ahead to make the most of your contracts and bonus cards, just like when you have to decide which vegetables you have to plant for your customers. Game is fast, it took me like 45 minutes including set up. Great if you don't have a lot of time but still want a game that tickles your brain. I got 48 points (a good beginner score is around 55 points) so I'm ok with my result. Next time I will try to fulfill more smaller contracts to have enough cash. You sell your contracts to get bonus cards (which give you certain types of goods when visiting the countries) and buildings (which give you some more points at the end). When fulfilling a contract you don't have to discard it so you can gather lots of small ones (they are quite easy to fulfill and it helps a great deal if you have many contracts which have to be fulfilled in the same country). You only discard a contract if you sold it off. Getting the higher contracts took me quite some time cause of the way you have to travel around to refill the goods in other countries so having more bonus cards in the beginning would have helped me alot in gathering more stuff. I'm really looking forward for another playthrough (I would have done another one right after the first but my wife canceled her appointment) and I'm eager so see how the game plays with more players. Selecta84 fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Feb 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
Counterpoint: I found Caverna interminably dull compared to Agricola. The larger expanse to play in means that there aren't as many cutthroat decisions to be made about what time to take what spot. I can't even recommend the singleplayer component, as it just isn't as fun compared to SP Mage Knight on Vassal. (And takes about the same amount of time.) To me, Agricola is all about the small playspace and the times you'll curse at someone for taking the one action your entire turn banked on. If you don't like that about Agricola then Caverna is probably better for you, though. There is one thing I like about Caverna more than Agricola, which is that I get a weird sense of glee in building up my cave. Somehow nothing in Agricola quite matches the sense of dumb satisfaction that building a room for all of your sheep provides in Caverna.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Ohthehugemanatee posted:Caverna really is amazing. I had Agricola and held off because of the price and not really seeing any need for what looked like an Agricola variant when the base game was one of the best things I've ever played. A friend finally cracked and I'm glad he did. The starvation mechanic is what makes Agricola actually playable. It narrows down your options to one or two possibilities, which you can path out in your head. Caverna gives you 10,000,000 "viable" games paths, there is no way to compare them all in your head and make a reasoned move. In Caverna you are just guessing that you have found a good strategy, there is no way to actually figure out. In Agricola you only have a few options that don't result in starving, so you can actually make an informed decision.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:The starvation mechanic is what makes Agricola actually playable. It narrows down your options to one or two possibilities, which you can path out in your head. Caverna gives you 10,000,000 "viable" games paths, there is no way to compare them all in your head and make a reasoned move. In Caverna you are just guessing that you have found a good strategy, there is no way to actually figure out. I somewhat agree with a Rutibex post. I've gone over it in this thread before, but Caverna shares a mechanic with Kemet that I personally dislike (but don't think everyone does, obviously!). There's this huge frontloading that can both paralyze and confuse possible strategies. In essence, if there's an engine that everyone can create, and everyone has a lot of leeway as to how to create that engine, and it's all available and visible at the start, it fucks with me and apparently with Rutibex too!
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Ryoshi posted:On an unrelated note I have a craving to buy Twilight Imperium and start up a yearly game day for it with some friends, someone talk me out of it before I drop another $70-99 on a game I'll rarely if ever get to actually play. It's been almost 3 years since I last played Game of Thrones, yet I regret nothing. I've got a good feeling it will make it to the table again in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:My theory of Game Value™ has evolved to include some more important factors than simple weight. To calculate a games value, you must look at both the number of "Discrete Gameplay Elements" (individual unique cards or tiles or whatever) per dollar, but also "Gameplay Element Interdependence Factor". Bulk weight of the game pre dollar is also a factor, or course, as you still want to obtain your plastic and cardboard at the best possible rate. I think you need to weight the different gameplay elements differently. While people might have differing preferences, metal > wood > plastic > thick cardstock > lesser cardstock would be my guess as to the objective ranking and weight for each component. I base this guess on the component makeup of deluxe versions of games compared to their normal counterparts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:I think you need to weight the different gameplay elements differently. While people might have differing preferences, metal > wood > plastic > thick cardstock > lesser cardstock would be my guess as to the objective ranking and weight for each component. I base this guess on the component makeup of deluxe versions of games compared to their normal counterparts. Those are qualitative differences and can not be measured objectively.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Those are qualitative differences and can not be measured objectively. I disagree. There are alternate components for a variety of board games (from both third parties and tournament promotions) where pieces made in a non-cardboard manner. We can even look up the willingness to pay for similar pieces and rank them accordingly. I think that's as objective of a measure as you can get.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:The starvation mechanic is what makes Agricola actually playable. It narrows down your options to one or two possibilities, which you can path out in your head. Caverna gives you 10,000,000 "viable" games paths, there is no way to compare them all in your head and make a reasoned move. In Caverna you are just guessing that you have found a good strategy, there is no way to actually figure out. I 100% agree with you, although the fault you describe is part of the charm to me. Agricola is tight to an extreme and moves are very calculated. I can almost always see a clear right move for every player's turn. Caverna gives you the exact same mechanics and just lets you run wild. You're right that it's much, much harder to spot the right move at any given time (if there even is a single one) and I like having to gestalt my way through the game because it requires a very different type of approach.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Price tag, and not the thousands of hours of playtime for a single game? COOL CORN has the right idea. A lot of games have daunting seeming rule sets or hundreds of components and it would be fun to be able to point to my shelf and say "okay we can play this sweet new game that looks complicated but will be super fun if you put in the 20 minutes of effort to learn it....or we can break out CfNA."
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
I don't think Caverna is as expansive as you make out, but it is obviously much less restrictive than Agricola. In particular, you can definitely hit some bottlenecks and do some blocking when it comes to expeditions. As with Kemet, though, I think it would make play much better if everyone had a reference sheet (for the furnishing tiles).
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
God drat, after watching a playthrough I really want to get glass road.... Any reasons not to buy it? The only reason I can think of at the moment is that the solo mode is a bit unappealing for me due to the way the card play works. Or isn't it as bad as I'm imagining it? The randomness seems kinda odd. Or would choosing the order of the cards played make it to easy?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
Glass Road is great. If you're considering it for solo play just hold out, there's an app for it in like a week or two. The solo game is actually pretty interesting but it sort of lacks that feeling of improvement because of how many different buildings there are and imperfect control of your cards, there is so much variability that there is no consistent good score to shoot for.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
I
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Wise words. Glass Road is good though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
Played Dakota a few nights ago. For those who don't know the game, it's a Worker Placement game with each worker gathering resources. Each resource space can be harvested by one of two factions: Settlers and Indians. Players choose which faction they're on at the beginning of the game in secret and reveal simultaneously. There's a re-pick if everyone is on one faction. Resource spaces have two sets of resources that each favor one faction of the other. The first set is favored by the Indians while the second set is favored by the Settlers. The second set of resources is also locked until the first set is cleared out. Once the second set is cleared out, a new resource space of that type opens up. I played in a 5P game and was the only Settler. Everyone else played Indians which unfortunately meant that while they were fighting over their resources, I could go and pick up my preferred resources without as much hassle. It's okay, but there's not much depth of strategy beyond playing one faction or the other.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
rchandra posted:(3 for Exploding Kittens, for reference). So exploding kittens is a game, that gives it a point by default. I guess it has art, so there's a 2 out of 10. Where is the third point coming from?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
The General posted:So exploding kittens is a game, that gives it a point by default. I guess it has art, so there's a 2 out of 10. Where is the third point coming from? It's a lot quicker to play than Munchkin
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
homullus posted:As with Kemet, though, I think it would make play much better if everyone had a reference sheet (for the furnishing tiles). You really do have to print out copies for everyone (or else have an amazing group of polyglot friends)
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 04:02
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:It's a lot quicker to play than Munchkin Yeah, basically this. It's fast and I don't actively hate life during play.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 05:20
|
|
|
Can any FCM-owning goons tell me the dimensions (in inches or mm) of the in-game tiles? I am working on papercraft components for FCM to offset the game's artistic blandness (plus I like to be able to see an actual city when working with a construction-style game) and would like them to actually be usable for people other than my own print-n-play copy that I'm mocking up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
I'm eager for this as a fan of the computer game, but it looks like a game that has the potential to be not bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Played Dakota a few nights ago. For those who don't know the game, it's a Worker Placement game with each worker gathering resources. Each resource space can be harvested by one of two factions: Settlers and Indians. Players choose which faction they're on at the beginning of the game in secret and reveal simultaneously. There's a re-pick if everyone is on one faction. Resource spaces have two sets of resources that each favor one faction of the other. The first set is favored by the Indians while the second set is favored by the Settlers. The second set of resources is also locked until the first set is cleared out. Once the second set is cleared out, a new resource space of that type opens up. I think Dakota's deeper than you let on. Dakota looks like a worker placement game but it's more of a cutthroat negotiation game. Again for those who don't know the game, three critical rules make it totally different from conventional worker placement: 1) A resource space is never blocked, you can pile on a larger number of meeples than other players in your faction already did and take first pick of the goods, maybe everything that's left before they get any. 2) The two factions can never draw from the same resource space on the same turn; instead whichever faction has more meeples there pushes the other off completely, and ties mean no one gets anything. 3) There is a pool of "neutral" Native and Settler meeples determined by the player balance, and after everyone goes clockwise placing their actual, useful, resource-collecting meeples, they then go counter-clockwise placing the neutral meeples to completely gently caress people over. Your fellow Native placed two meeples trying to get buffalo? gently caress you, I'm placing two Settlers to kick you off, and then putting a neutral Native on the space I'm harvesting to prevent someone from loving me over the same way. It's very easy to get caught in a spiral of blocking and revenge, because the other faction isn't directly competing for resources with you while your "allies" are. But if your faction can't get its poo poo together, the other one is likely to manage the resource spaces to their favor, collect them more efficiently, and wreck you all on victory points. So winning the game demands negotiation and skillful deal-making. That said, while I enjoy it, I wouldn't recommend it without a big caveat. For people who enjoy a negotiation game like Chinatown, I'm not sure how much enthusiasm they'll feel for way more betrayal and acrimonious blocking in their deal-brokering. Edit: but you can get Dakota for $8.99 with free shipping on Tanga so uhhh I'd recommend it pretty strongly at that price! Vanilla Bison fucked around with this message at 06:22 on Feb 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 06:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 06:47 |
|
|
Looks like they just added 5 player games for FCM on Boardgamecore
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 06:49
|
|
