|
Gilgameshback posted:Any consensus on revised Agricola vs. classic? They're about the same price on Amazon. Read what others have said (besides Rutibex I guess) but I think either is fine, and the new edition should probably slot better with the 6 player expansion they are releasing later. If you can deal with waiting it'll probably be smoother and feel less like a bunch of stuff thrown together, if that matters any.
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 14:27 |
|
|
I just dump all the components from games from the table into the box amongst the mostly smashed pieces of the original insert, and then only sort it out when introducing it to a group of new players before reading the rulebook to them
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
The most convenient solution is to just discard the game after use and buy it again, incidentally please visit us at your FLGS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
malkav11 posted:Wasn't there going to be a version of Agricola with all the cards (expansions etc included) to go with the stripped down revised version? There was. This version has not received as much priority as the new "high margin" Editions of Agricola. They claim it will come out some time in the future and contain 1000 of the best cards from http://playagricola.com/Agricola/Cards/index.php I got tired of waiting and just made my own, my personal Agricola set now has more cards than the special master edition  EvilChameleon posted:Read what others have said (besides Rutibex I guess) but I think either is fine, and the new edition should probably slot better with the 6 player expansion they are releasing later. If you can deal with waiting it'll probably be smoother and feel less like a bunch of stuff thrown together, if that matters any. Yes! Make sure to buy the edition with less pieces included, so that you can buy the expansion later! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
It's not like Agricola is a poorly balanced game to begin with, I'm glad I bought the Zman edition with all the cards.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
No but as stated, the vanilla version is very much an exercise of picking out the few power cards/combos from a big pile of junk. If the newer version is streamlined to be more balanced overall that sounds like a lot of fun (and does away with RNG fuckery for non-draft modes).
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
Malloreon posted:Also played Chaos in the Old World for the effectively first time, as Khorne. Only 3 player, which I think was a mistake. I did not do well - I focused too much on going after Tzeentch, who was able to deflect my attacks enough that I wasn't winning the dial game. Slaanesh ended up winning. Yeah, not having a fourth player was a mistake, nothing personal. Each of the Gods is important for the game's balance; Nurgle would have given you more targets and wouldn't be able to deflect you as easily.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:No but as stated, the vanilla version is very much an exercise of picking out the few power cards/combos from a big pile of junk. If the newer version is streamlined to be more balanced overall that sounds like a lot of fun (and does away with RNG fuckery for non-draft modes). "Listen, I can take a dump in an Agricola box and say it's got extra content. I will. I got spare time. But for now, for your sake, for your friend's sake , ya might wanna think about buying a balanced game from me."
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 05:13
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Reminder that balance is a foreign term to this idiot that considers Monopoly perfectly balanced. Monopoly is perfectly balanced. It's also perfectly random.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 11:31
|
|
|
foxxtrot posted:I pulled the trigger on Descent, due to the App removing the need for a Dungeon Master player. I have not pulled the trigger on the everything as some people have, but we'll see if that holds. Descent is one of the few games that my local store has a good selection of stuff for. I also picked this up yesterday from a local guy on the cheap. I know it was mentioned before but what are the best expansions to start looking toward to play with the app campaign? Just a bunch of monster packs and eventually some big boxes?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Monopoly is perfectly balanced. It's also perfectly random. No, he argued that every single property is equal and balanced
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:No, he argued that every single property is equal and balanced They are! Most properties go up for auction, so whatever Monopoly statistics you have studied from the internet will be factored into their ultimate price. Edit: I was setting up my Agricola boards for a game this morning, and I figured this thread might enjoy a look at my home made Through the Seasons expansion  
Rutibex fucked around with this message at 15:29 on Jul 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
I'm not going to waste my time explaining anything to you. Go choke on cereal box cardboard.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:They are! Most properties go up for auction, so whatever Monopoly statistics you have studied from the internet will be factored into their ultimate price. Does anybody actually play these with you? More than once? Willingly?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
Please stop replying to Rutibex. He just drops another dumb idea and everyone then spends three pages banging their heads against the wall trying to prove him wrong, but he will never accept it. Related to actual board games, is the Argent: the Consortium expansion worth it? The game already has quite a lot of moving parts, so I'm not sure about adding more.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
MorphineMike posted:Related to actual board games, is the Argent: the Consortium expansion worth it? The game already has quite a lot of moving parts, so I'm not sure about adding more. It's a very modular expansion, so you will likely find something worth adding, like just adding more cards to the piles already in the game. I also really like the additional bell cards. I like to rotate out all the ones besides the first player one, and it gives a nice variability to turn length, as the various bonuses entice in one way or another.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:
Yeah, I agree with this post absolutely. Also if you want to paint your bases you'll need the expansion to have enough for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
MorphineMike posted:Related to actual board games, is the Argent: the Consortium expansion worth it? The game already has quite a lot of moving parts, so I'm not sure about adding more. Absolutely. As has been said, it's entirely modular so you can add whatever takes your fancy. But the new department has cool toys, and the various other new bits all add even more lovely variety - particularly the bell cards and the Scenarios (which largely emphasize particular aspects of play, makes a nice change of pace). There are a couple of new rooms that are a tad complicated, but nothing too terrible and you can just leave them out if you'd rather not deal. Very little new rules overhead, mostly just more stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Durendal posted:You either don't own a game with a piece count over 500, or you are fine with hour+ setup/tear down. yup true point made
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
One thing I like about Axis and Allies is that each nation comes with a box you can put all the pieces in tgat fits together in the game box. Therefore organized, safe from damage
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Yeah, A&A's box organization is ideal. It makes the game's setup time just "arduous" instead of "completely unreasonable." Zombicide is also fantastic because everything fits perfectly back into the boxes it came in. Has anyone had any success in finding or making something for tokens on the game table? It would be nice if all the tokens for Firefly were ready to go.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
Zurui posted:
Something like this?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
People in here discuss storage with religious zeal but it can really depend on your play area and personal preference. I usually play on a ping pong table where it is difficult to place anything in reach of all players, even when sticking to one corner, so having baggies can be really useful for passing stuff around the table. Like, for instance, having each nation in Imperial bagged for easy movement when someone takes it over.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
foxxtrot posted:Something like this?  $159.99
I don't love any game enough to pay $160 to store it. Edit: They also offer the As Advertised version for nearly twice the price. cenotaph posted:I usually play on a ping pong table where it is difficult to place anything in reach of all players, even when sticking to one corner, so having baggies can be really useful for passing stuff around the table. I was thinking of appropriating lure or medication boxes. Something small enough to pass around and with a lid so things don't go pear-shaped when I store the box on its side. Zurui fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Jul 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
Zurui posted:
Gamers are retards. Go to a garage sale and spend $1 on something like this:  
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
A tackle box would be great but that is too far down the rabbit hole for me at this point. Game boxes are attractive and help sell the game to my poor, poor friends. Some day they are going to see through my lies. "Of course you can finish a game in the time it says on the box." "You don't need to read the rulebook, just learn as you go." "I don't have a problem. I just need another bookcase."
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Zurui posted:I was thinking of appropriating lure or medication boxes. Something small enough to pass around and with a lid so things don't go pear-shaped when I store the box on its side.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Flea market haul! Abyss Panamax Barony Imperial Assault (for $40!) sealed Eminent Domain with promos sealed FFG Planet Steam sealed Modern art all for $160 and.... once-played Food Chain Magnate for $85. amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
Use baggies and pour the contents into little plastic cups/trays. You can get them dirt cheap at your local dollar store. Something with corners is probably better to help pouring them back into bags when you're done, but I've got ten or so little plastic bowls that I use all the time for various games and they work great.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
silicon cupcake liners
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Malloreon posted:once-played Food Chain Magnate for $85. Wow I am so loving jealous
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:silicon cupcake liners I don't know if you're the one who suggested this before, but I followed this suggestion and it was a good and inexpensive solution. Since they're flexible, they also transport well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
This is the reaction I was hoping for. I have some Broken Token inserts, though I do waffle about the price sometimes, but this Firefly box is probably the most ridiculous boardgame product I've ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
foxxtrot posted:This is the reaction I was hoping for. I have some Broken Token inserts, though I do waffle about the price sometimes, but this Firefly box is probably the most ridiculous boardgame product I've ever seen. Then you have clearly not seen this $2 million dollar solid gold Monopoly: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Then you have clearly not seen this $2 million dollar solid gold Monopoly: That paper money better be made with recycled $1000 bills.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
http://imgur.com/a/ryVBr Move complete, game table and game shelves up! I am officially home 
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
I want that table.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Then you have clearly not seen this $2 million dollar solid gold Monopoly: Melt this fucker down and make hero of the proletariat awards from it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Then you have clearly not seen this $2 million dollar solid gold Monopoly: Capitalism is cool and good. This is the proof.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 14:27 |
|
|
Texibus posted:But the problem comes up when they don't pick the number 1 as a clue. Because the Spymaster has essentially made the number in their clue a clue, which they can't do according to the rules. Basically they pick two and let you know that you were wrong about your guess. From the way I read his post, he said "don't clue me on Date, cause I'm going to guess that card anyway". That's not the same as saying "if you clue only 1 card, I'm going to assume it's Date". He's saying that no matter the clue he's going to assume it's not Date because he already knows that is one of them. I don't think it's going against the spirit of the game at all. While I've never had someone be that explicit, I think every game I've ever played of codenames has had at least some variation of: Guesser: "Hm...is it hat or head?" (Chooses Head) Spymaster: (puts an innocent on Head) Guesser: "Ah, well then I guess it's hat" He's not specifically saying "i'm going to guess Hat next" but the spymaster knows that he doesn't need to clue that one anymore. One thing I stress to new players when I teach it, especially in a 4 player game, is to talk out everything your thinking. I see absolutely no reason to withhold your thought process from the spymaster. If you're on the wrong track they can try to fix it in the next round, and if you're on the right track they know they don't have to bother with the clue. I don't think you can compare Codenames to something like Hanabi. In Hanabi, everyone has the same amount of knowledge (albeit different knowledge) so there's meta ways you can cheat. In Codenames, one player has all the knowledge and the other(s) have none. The only way to cheat in this way is if the Spymaster does something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 22:14
|
|