|
EvilChameleon posted:Spirits of the Rice Paddy has this, the first time I've seen it used. I like it a lot. I wonder if it costs a lot to make compared to just a regular player board. ie - will we be seeing it a lot more now that it's out there? I'm completely ignorant of the board game manufacturing process, but wouldn't it ~double the cost of materials and increase manufacturing costs (because of the process needed to put them together) for somewhat negligible benefits? I'm not sure it was a big deal to keep things in vaguely the right place on a player board, but I also don't have cats.
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 14:23 |
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:I'm completely ignorant of the board game manufacturing process, but wouldn't it ~double the cost of materials and increase manufacturing costs (because of the process needed to put them together) for somewhat negligible benefits? I'm not sure it was a big deal to keep things in vaguely the right place on a player board, but I also don't have cats. It depends a lot on the volume being produced. Economy of scale applies heavily, where at a certain point the cost of adding more cardboard is literally pennies, especially in a case like the Scythe boards where they're exactly the same size and don't really require much different handling. I think it's pretty drat slick and am glad he did it, and hope other publisher's pick up on the technique in the future, where applicable. I don't think it's needed for every game that has tokens, but it sure was nice when a couple knees-to-the-table the other night could have made a mess of things but everything was a-okay.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
Jedit posted:When it comes out, Tiny Epic Western would be perfect. Plays to five and uses poker as it's main mechanic. No no no no no no no! As a former professional poker player, I would have zero interest in a game that 'uses poker' in it. If I wanted that, I'd go play cards. If I'm playing board games, I want to play something unrelated!
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
SirFelixCat posted:No no no no no no no! Then don't play it? He was answering someone else that specifically asked about bridging poker and board games, so a board game that has a western theme and a poker-lite mini-game mixed in to a worker placement game will be perfect.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Thanks, thread, for recommending WHQ:ACG based on my enjoyment of Death Angel. It is brutally difficult.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
CaptainRightful posted:Is Scythe the first game to use double-thick recessed player mats? Because it's a brilliant idea. Hegemonic is the first time I saw it. It was an early Kickstarter stretch goal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Then don't play it? He was answering someone else that specifically asked about bridging poker and board games, so a board game that has a western theme and a poker-lite mini-game mixed in to a worker placement game will be perfect. And I'm responding to that saying that it's not the way that I imagine other poker players would want to be introduced into boardgames. So no, It's likely to not be perfect, but thanks for the condescension.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
"As a former professional" firmly puts you outside of the realm of an average person's approach. Your taste does not apply to the vast majority of people or their view of the game. And yes, people generally connect better when they can relate aspects of a new medium to what they're familiar with. That's basic psychology.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
Just did a mechanical playthrough of Arkwright (Spinning Jenny). I know for a fact I wasn't playing it well, but given its reputation it's surprisingly accessible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Just did a mechanical playthrough of Arkwright (Spinning Jenny). I know for a fact I wasn't playing it well, but given its reputation it's surprisingly accessible. Agreed. The way demand is met becomes intuitive, once you learn it. It's a step-up once you add the extra parts that Waterframe bring to the game, but that's when it blossoms. It's no longer just about meeting domestic demand, but choosing when/if/how to ship goods overseas and that flips the domestic market and calculated risks (based on turn order) on its head. Enjoy!
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:"As a former professional" firmly puts you outside of the realm of an average person's approach. Your taste does not apply to the vast majority of people or their view of the game. Yes, it puts me outside of the norm, but the bolded in the OP also seems to put the poker player in question much more removed from 'average person's approach' too. "I will be hosting a game night tonight for 4-5 players and one of the players has no experience in "geeky" games, but plays a lot of poker."
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
"Plays a lot of poker" is pretty normal for poker players. Most of them have a poker night weekly or monthly. That's far removed from any professional setting, be it online or physical. Your reaction and dismissal of the recommendation was still ridiculous ("No no no no no no!") and being so flustered by my response defending the game is immature at best. The game is ideal for a playgroup of board gamers and poker players to bridge the two interests. If you can't understand that, maybe the concept is too heavy for you.
Bottom Liner fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Jul 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
lordsummerisle posted:That's what I was afraid of. Looks like we will be at 5 players tonight, and dry euros aren't very popular with one of them. Maybe Steampunk Rally just would be the best, that shouldnt be too hard to teach a newcomer, right? So I'd just try a bunch of different games that play reasonably quickly. (Which means not Keyflower with 5.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
I've recently had a chance to play quite a bit of Hoplomachus: Rise of Rome and Hoplomachus: Origins. These are interesting gladiator-themed games that use a very simple and light system paired with very good components. Origins is much more successful than Rise of Rome. Hoplomachus: Rise of Rome is an arena combat game that pits gladiators from Rome against gladiators from Pompeii; or, either team or both together can battle a powerful titan, which is controlled by die rolls and a simple script. The components are lavish: a large mousepad-style map, and lots of heavy, shiny poker chips to represent the gladiators. Gladiators have a few simple statistics (health, range, movement, tactical range, and attack dice) coupled with one or two special abilities. The Roman and Pompeiian teams are evenly matched, except for a few special units and their champions. I think the idea with this was to make the game more chess-like and to push players to come up with novel tactics and clever uses of a small set of abilities. This is only partially successful, mostly because of two elements of the game's structure. One is the huge arena, the other is the fact that gladiators enter play one at a time. Both of these factors tend to drag out play, with gladiators entering combat slowly and spending time traversing the arena towards the other team. The same is true in battles against the titans, although some of the titans have fast movement or simply teleport. Nonetheless the overlarge map interferes with the pacing and tension, and makes the individual statistics and abilities of the units at least seem less important. The fact that there are relatively few abilities and different units in the game worsens this problem. It's not by any means a bad game, but it makes some missteps that can thin out the game play and make it just slightly dull. There's also a rather feeble crowd favor mechanic that does little to move things along. Hoplomachus: Origins solves all the issues I had with Rise of Rome. It comes with three very small arenas and a much more diverse group of combatants. It also adds two new victory conditions (moving a treasure into an opponent's goal, and occupying a central platform) that greatly expand the tactical gameplay. The components are also very good, and in fact are completely compatible with Rise of Rome - they use almost exactly the same system, though Origins dispenses with Rise of Rome's pointless crowd favor mechanic. It also has a robust solo/co-op mode, a series of set battles that are much more intense and puzzle-like than the titan fights in the previous game. Origins is a terrific light tactical wargame.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Early opinion of Star Trek Frontiers: apart from the ugly graphics it is easier than Mage Knight which has the side effect of being better suited for truly competitive play since a major setback isn't a death sentence. Don't go rushing to sell your MK collection but people hesitant to MK will find this more accessible as a heavier adventure game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Lorini posted:Exactly why I don't like Stonemaier as a designer. Right up there with dumbest rule ever. Lorini posted:Scythe collectors edition upgrade worth it? I own metal coins already but was interested in the component upgrades. Based on that and current pricing, absolutely not. If you just want the resources for something else, buy some of the Treasure Chest packages. They aren't cheap, but you'll get what you want. By all accounts, people will slot me as a fanboy for Stonemaier and I don't know that I can argue too much with them. I tend to really enjoy their products and the overall experiences. I think I can be objective about their products, but you can take the following with a grain of salt if you need to. I have the Collectors Edition. I opened it last night and frankly after watching a couple weeks of people opening theirs and posting pics in BGG I didn't have the thrill I was expecting. There is a LOT of stuff in there. The resource token bag had opened in transit and the 'real' metal tokens traveled about the box some leaving a few minor dents in one of the player boards. I've gotten these deluxe tokens before in Euphoria and one of the treasure chests so the metal at this stage wasn't a very big deal to me. It's done in a matte tone and looks like...bars of metal. Hard to screw that up I think. The sacks of grain are new to me and are pretty darn cool. The oil barrels are neat in that they aren't wooden bits, but you can only do so much with a barrel, you know? The wood tokens were in one of my prior Treasure chest purchases as well so again, very cool, but not new to me. Being the cheaper type, I'd pay about $5/20 for them. If I were not so cheap, 50 cents a piece would probably be a fair cost, and it would be higher than that in real life. The coins...I don't know what to say. I keep getting lured into metal coins but metal gaming coins aren't real coins. I love that they aren't cardboard (I really do) yet they just never have the heft of a real coin. They (game coins in general) are made out of a light metal and then coated to look like something they are not, which is a heavier metal. The design of the coins is great. The coloring is fantastic. The quantity is sufficient but let's be honest in that everyone always wants more of them than market forces can allow. The experience is...just over marginally better than that of cardboard coins. Most of the wood bits are re-used dies from other games. (most notably, Viticulture) Each faction has a new die cut meeple, but none of them make me go crazy with desire for more. That's in the standard edition anyhow. So really the only other item in the Collectors Edition is the extended board and you can buy that separate anyhow. (And that bigger map is just....AWESOME, but SO drat BIG) All of that, based on the notion that I'm a fanboy, tells me that you probably don't want to put your money there. If you enjoyed Stonemaier games in general and saw yourself playing this a lot, then I'd say treat yourself. But if you already aren't that thrilled, keep your monies and your sanity. Hope that helps. Das Doppelganger fucked around with this message at 20:52 on Jul 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
CaptainRightful posted:Is Scythe the first game to use double-thick recessed player mats? Because it's a brilliant idea. al-azad posted:Hegemonic is the first time I saw it. It was an early Kickstarter stretch goal. I cannot speak to whether or not Jamey saw it elsewhere, but I believe at least in part Hegemonic was inspiration for the dual layer mats.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
I had later posted that my friend says it plays perfectly fine with once seen always seen house rules so my original concern about that has been mitigated, thus the question about ordering it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
Man, say what you will about rahdo, but him roleplaying his totally not imaginary wife does actually add something to his videos. I'm writing this with a Marco Polo walkthrough video playing in the background that I gave up on following at least ten minutes ago because watching a dude just play against himself without any kind of pretense is just boring and slightly sad. I realize that this is kinda silly but having even a fake second player helps me stay interested.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
Lorini posted:I had later posted that my friend says it plays perfectly fine with once seen always seen house rules so my original concern about that has been mitigated, thus the question about ordering it. Yeah, while it sounds like it's saying "don't look at coin stacks!", most of your income comes at the end of the game from various rewards and bonuses for completed objectives, controlled territories, # of resources, and a building objective that changes each game, and what all those bonuses are worth individually vary depending on your position on the popularity track. It's not a "don't look at people's small stack of coins" rule, it's a "don't bust out a pad of paper and math out three different scoring scenarios for every player based on what their popularity might be at the end of the game multiple times throughout the game." You have a pretty general sense of how well people are doing throughout the game but knowing exactly what scoring track they're going to be landing on and what they'll do in their final couple turns muddiest the waters (in a good way) and that's pretty clearly an intentional design.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
Lorini posted:I had later posted that my friend says it plays perfectly fine with once seen always seen house rules so my original concern about that has been mitigated, thus the question about ordering it. Yeah, I read that too which is why I didn't post earlier. It just sounded like you had some overall negative feelings towards the designer and their games so I couldn't see tossing $200+ at a collectors edition of one of their games. Another point to make about the counting of coins is that there is ultimately very little you can do about it in the game. I can somewhat agree on once known and now hidden information being less than ideal design when it matters or you can do something. In Scythe, there is nothing you can do to TAKE my coins from me. So knowing I have 2 coins or 10 doesn't advance your game goal entirely. Of course, you can glean general information such as "huh. That kat has a pile of coins over there bigger than everyone else AND lots of resources on the board. I should go get their resources!" But all that does is point you towards their resources, which you probably should have noticed before and gone after anyhow. So, the overall point of 'don't count coins' isn't so much a 'make it hidden info' decision as an 'its just wasting time, don't bother' call. The designer himself plays with all coins revealed/not stacked. I would guess it was simply put in there to head off any AP people saying you can't stack coins.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
The quality of the components in Scythe is great. But after two plays, the game itself has left me flat. It seems like a game of multiplayer solitaire. Both times were with two players, and that may be why, but there is little or no interaction. I will try again with a higher player count, but so far so meh. Try before you buy would be my advice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
Beffer posted:The quality of the components in Scythe is great. Yes two players seems less than ideal due to the side of the board. You have enough space to not fight or engage over objectives other than the factory. You can split exploration real easy just by going after ones near you. My biggest gripe is probably that nothing changes to force interaction the less players you have meaning 5 players is great and claustrophobic. 4 still sees interaction over at least the building bonuses. 3 sees little need for interesting and I haven't played 2 but I could see us not interacting at all unless someone leaves a nice juicy target open for attack. (Say leaving a tunnel open against Saxony because they don't have anyone on a tunnel)
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Tunnels let you cover the entire board pretty rapidly, even in two player. That said, it's more Euro than Conflict, so if you want a high conflict game, you'll only want to play at higher numbers where it simply can't be avoided.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
Beffer posted:The quality of the components in Scythe is great. I think that's almost certainly a big part of why. Factions will also make a difference. Saxony, for example, has a big incentive to start fights as long as they're in a position to win them, since they can earn as many combat stars as they want. It's not a game about combat, certainly, but there are limited resources in play (factory tiles, encounters), winning fights gets you stars (to a point, for anyone but Saxony) and territory control is a major scoring concern, so there's encouragement to interact. There's just too much room to really push you into butting heads when there's only two factions on the board.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
Scythe chat. I have the Art Connoisseur edition, a friend got the premium edition. We played with the realistic components and how he's chomping at the bit to get them for his copy. I'm at a point where I'll pretty much go all in on a Stonemeir game because I know he'll knock the components out of the park. Yes the coins aren't real coins, but they're still much more satisfying to play with than cardboard pieces. I loved the coins in Viticulture and I love them in Scythe and I'll love them in whatever his next game is that includes them. RE: gameplay, we played a 3 player game with not a ton of conflict, but we played a 5 player game with also not a ton of conflict but the board filled up quite a bit making things a little more interesting, and what conflict there was made things a lot more decisive. I attacked someone as Polania so I displaced 3 workers without taking a popularity loss and captured 3 wood that kind of ruined the plans he was making. I'm kind of looking forward to the expansion that includes rules for 7 players, because then the board will actually get kind of tight and drive a lot more conflict. I also think as we play more and realize how holding territory is important, there will be more spreading out and more conflict. Finally, I like that even though it's a complicated looking game, it's not all that complicated, and turns move pretty quickly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
I think with two-player Scythe you have to really take advantage of the zero-sum nature of it and actively attack resources your opponent has left on the board, even if doing so right now is a slight inconvenience for you. If both players studiously avoided conflict the game would be quite boring and noninteractive, given how much board you have to play with. I've played with 3 players twice and 5 players once, with the second 3-player game actually being the most conflict-heavy - the structure bonus that time was "build stuff on tunnels", which definitely helped with that a bit since there aren't enough tunnels to go around. But there was a lot of aggressive movement to secure tunnels and block other players from reaching useful locations, and a bunch of stealing resources (even just to hoard them for endgame points) etc. - all the players easily had 4+ combat wins (so it's a good thing no-one was playing saxony). It's worth noting that once one big fight happens, the player who wasn't involved has a lot of incentive to get aggressive themselves, since both their opponents just used up a lot of their combat resources. It's kind of cold-war-turns-hot thing - there's lots of posturing and not much actual conflict initially, but once someone actually throws down suddenly everyone wants a piece of the action.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
This probably isnt the best night to break out my new copy of Coup but gently caress it
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 03:54
|
|
|
I just bought codenames thanks to this thread! Thanks guys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 04:12
|
|
|
Yeah I played some four player Scythe on Thursday. Had something like six or seven battles over the course of the game and they were definitely decisive. Very close in the end. 4 is a good player count.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
Just imagine what Scythe will be like when the expansion comes out and you can play it with SEVEN  (My copy hasn't even been dispatched yet come on Ideaspatcher get your poo poo together)
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 09:40
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Just imagine what Scythe will be like when the expansion comes out and you can play it with SEVEN Some people have got there's with out any dispatch notification and some people have just got a text message notification.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
Any opinions on Empires: Age of Discovery?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
We played Mystic Vale yesterday, and while I thought that the idea of a "cardbuilder" game was pretty interesting, the game itself felt very...basic? It was a first play, so take that for what it's worth, but I didn't really see anything resembling any interesting interactions or really any deep strategizing. It also has the dubious honor of being a market row deckbuilder, but at least there are like 5 different markets to choose from of 3 cards each, so that wasn't too bad at least. Also, the push your luck mechanic really encouraged card counting, which is one of those things that I find super tedious. It came as no surprise that the game was pretty much a beta test for another game AEG had in the works, but I get the feeling it probably won't be that great either, aside from the admittedly cool and novel concept that I wish was bolted onto a better game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
I have so far only played scythe 2 player and we've enjoyed every game. They've all been quite different, too - finish one game just in time to want to try something different next go (or to know what you did wrong). Using my mobility advantage to drop workers around the board as popularity-hit landmines and speed bumps (since moving into territory with an enemy unit stops your movement) was my favorite rear end in a top hat move so far 
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Rumda posted:Some people have got there's with out any dispatch notification and some people have just got a text message notification. As far as I can tell nobody has received either the game or a tracking number in the UK yet. Ideaspatcher have really dropped the ball on this one, apparently for no reason at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
CaptainApathyUK posted:As far as I can tell nobody has received either the game or a tracking number in the UK yet. Ideaspatcher have really dropped the ball on this one, apparently for no reason at all. Ideadespatcher are just really badly organised. They have consistently screwed up on Millennium Blades too. I hope both L99 and the Scythe Guys have learned not to use them again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
CaptainApathyUK posted:As far as I can tell nobody has received either the game or a tracking number in the UK yet. Ideaspatcher have really dropped the ball on this one, apparently for no reason at all. Yeah it was more just hopeful thinking that it would arrive today since my gaming group meets Sundays and Thursdays.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
So me and tomdidiot (a wargames thread regular) played in a megagame today that's basically set around the time of Virgin Queen: Good things: - It was really cool! I wheeled and dealed and there were loads of politics and shenanigans and I really enjoyed my time. We managed to keep Venice on an even keel and didn't lose any territories even with the Ottomans breathing down our necks. I managed to get elected Doge, I almost got elected Pope, I sold state secrets to the Portuguese, sailed a fleet and did a suicidal invasion of Greece, got captured and only ransomed by the slightest of margins, managed to get the Ottomans to get my family out of captivity, rigged a Doge election to my favour and etc etc. Bad things; - It wasn't really a wargame. Combat was 4+ and it's understandable why that was done, but there wasn't any manoeuvring involved. tomdidiot spent his entire time begging people for money to pay militia/mercs and pushing his troops forwards in North Africa, then rolling dice, repeat ad infinitum. There was a lot of book-keeping so he couldn't do the same amount of politicking that I did in Venice. Overall I enjoyed it! It's a very different atmosphere and it was kind of cool meeting people and doing plots and not knowing what is happening half of the time. I would recommend going to one if you have the chance!
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 14:23 |
|
|
Based on the twitter teaser image looks like the next One Night game will be Western themed. ONUW is the best role deduction game ever in my opinion, but I'm not really sure what room there is to keep expanding the series. ONUW shines because it streamlines role deduction down to it's more core elements, allowing for simple and quick gameplay. This strength became easily apparent when Vampire really dropped the ball by making things tediously complex. I'm not really sure how they are going to add new features without ruining what makes Werewolf so good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 21:57
|
|
