|
Mister Sinewave posted:jfc who the gently caress AP's out on Camel Up I play with a lot of people who are engineers professionally, and it's essentially what's described above.
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Oh, it's not under order of business like I expected it to be. But poo poo, it's random. Just draft the city tiles and have turn order be reverse order of the draft.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Oh, it's not under order of business like I expected it to be. But poo poo, it's random. All Splotter games I've ever seen except Indonesia have random elements in setup but virtually nowhere else.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
Even 18XX uses randomized seating order before the opening auction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
Jedit posted:All Splotter games I've ever seen except Indonesia have random elements in setup but virtually nowhere else. City cards are distributed randomly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
Yeah it's weird. Like it's the difference between picking a turn order in the game vs picking one before the game. e.g. Chess and Go, where there's a specific turn order. It's chosen before the game probably in a random manner, but isn't part of the game per say. The obvious analogous thing to do would be to say company X always starts first, followed by Y and Z. Same effect, but it could then correctly say there's no randomness involved. It's a really dumb and extremely grognardy thing but I was hoping it didn't have that since the box says no dice and my board gaming group will probably still laugh at it despite me assuring them it's a nice, heavy game. Papes posted:Just draft the city tiles and have turn order be reverse order of the draft. Sounds good. Might try this after a couple plays.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Hello Board Game Thread. This is crossposted with the chat thread so if you saw my post here you can cheerfully page down and not miss anything. So I have a favor to ask. I'm currently taking a class at my university. Specifically, it's "Business of Games", run by an entrepreneurship professor who also happens to be a giant nerd, so there's some nice cross discipline mixing there. Our assignment for this week was to come up with a survey for our game/company/service we're marketing and get people to take it (Well, okay, we did that last week and now we're to revise them and get more respondents but still!). I give this context because while it's for a business class, and yes it's a board game idea I have kicking around (basically my wife and I going "what if there was a JRPG version of BSG?"), it's not an actual marketing survey and I'm not trying to stealth market research you guys, I'm just looking for data for my class (i.e. this isn't for something I actually want to sell, it was just what I picked for the various class projects).. Of course, my problem is that due to Various Things, I'm a bit behind schedule on this and I may have a slight deadline of like fourteen hours from now to get as many responses as I can. I'm not exactly going to claim excellent student on this one. So, if people could be awesome and take the survey, it shouldn't be more than seven minutes or so. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JWLNJCS Also if this is against the rules and the wrath of Ettin comes down on me, I apologize. If that doesn't happen and people do take the survey then I like you very much and thank you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:Since I've mainly played COINs in solitaire, I treat them like puzzle games where I can take hours to ponder a move. I can only imagine what this would make me like in a 4-player game. Do you feel like COIN games have a lot of strategic decisions, or are they more about identifying the optimal move?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
I took your survey, but I also hope you get probated. Equivalent exchange.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
I took your survey. You could have also asked me, "Do you like board games?*" and probably gotten the same amount of useful information in my case. *Yes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
Its kind of annoying that the first block is arranged from "disagree" to "agree" and the next block is the opposite.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 04:11
|
|
|
TheCog posted:Its kind of annoying that the first block is arranged from "disagree" to "agree" and the next block is the opposite. Hmm I might have filled out parts of the survey incorrectly, because I did not notice that. Whups. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
TheCog posted:Its kind of annoying that the first block is arranged from "disagree" to "agree" and the next block is the opposite. Yeah also this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
I noticed that and was similarly annoyed by it, but did realize it before submitting. Good luck.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
I've come to realise I just don't like traitor games - at least, traitor games that go for more than like 10 minutes. It's frustrating to spend a whole game trying to find out who to trust, have to deal with suboptimal play (possibly intentionally, possibly not), only to have what feels like a fairly weak "I fooled you!" moment at the end of it all. It works well in games like One Night Ultimate Werewolf, but I find even Resistance too long for me to enjoy, and every time I've played BSG in the past two years has turned out to be anticlimactic (admittedly, only about 4 times, but that's enough times to play a 2+ hour game you've realised you don't like). The only traitor mechanic in a long game I've actually liked recently is the insanity mechanic from Mansions of Madness 2E, as it's an additional punishment for already being on the way to losing the game and you know exactly who to be wary of, just not what their plan is. Anyone else in a similar boat? If you can't understand where I'm coming from, what it is about traitor games that you enjoy?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 08:04
|
|
|
I liked BSG the two times I played it, but the players were also good and took roles seriously. Besides that I've never played a traitor game I've particularly liked. One Night Werewolf in particular I just find boring. Avalon was ok the first game, no interest playing it after that. I think it's just not my "thing".
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
TheCog posted:Its kind of annoying that the first block is arranged from "disagree" to "agree" and the next block is the opposite. Don't worry. It's also not mandatory to answer all the questions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 08:29
|
|
|
Something for the methodology write-upChill la Chill posted:Yeah it's weird. Like it's the difference between picking a turn order in the game vs picking one before the game. e.g. Chess and Go, where there's a specific turn order. It's chosen before the game probably in a random manner, but isn't part of the game per say. The obvious analogous thing to do would be to say company X always starts first, followed by Y and Z. Same effect, but it could then correctly say there's no randomness involved. You're worried that your friends will think FCM is a luckfest because the starting turn order is random, and you'd prefer to have a set starting company (but who's playing which company is random). You've gone off the deep end. Anyway, if you're teaching it, just lie and say it's done alphabetically, or by age! Whichever benefits you most.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 12:17
|
|
|
Just go all in and bid for turn order, or auction the role of the player who decides the turn order.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 12:45
|
|
|
Turn order is balanced in FCM due to setup, so I don't think it's such a big issue. In the first turns the turn order tends to switch over anyway, since right at the start it is advantageous to be last in turn sequence, but this means that you get to pick last next turn. After you have done three turns it becomes important to judge how many slots to leave open, so the starting order matters very little at that point. EDIT: Also it's still 100% dice free because the accepted method of picking companies that go first is to put them all in your fist and letting them drop one by one  And yeah, I don't get what the difference is between randomly assigning companies that have a preset order to people vs. randomly determining what the order of companies is after people have picked companies. Unless you allow players to specifically pick companies, but that's pretty much the same as allowing players to pick which slot in the turn order they want to be in. Tekopo fucked around with this message at 13:04 on Sep 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 12:56
|
|
|
I just got an out-of-the-blue message on BGG from someone in my area who plays COIN games and wants to get together. Hell yeah!
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 13:17
|
|
|
You are half of the way there to getting a full table, congrats!
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 13:18
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:You are half of the way there to getting a full table, congrats! The person has a spouse! That's 3!
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
In FCM tournament play seating order is determined by your seed in the tournament, which is determined by your ELO rating. It's only determined randomly for filthy casuals.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 13:31
|
|
|
"We are apparently missing two players, how about we play some ASL instead?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 13:33
|
|
|
So apparently Quinns did not pull the article on the LoL game due to a conflict of interests, but rather a press embargo and will in fact have it reviewed on his site by a friend.  [edit] Quinns posted:will cost $75 plus shipping, a price that means – purely in terms of components – this box is the best value for money that the board game scene has ever seen. Gear up, Rutibex!!!
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 13:39
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Do you feel like COIN games have a lot of strategic decisions, or are they more about identifying the optimal move? I have 3 COIN games (CL, FitL, FS) but I have only played the last two vs the bots, not human opponents. So as a solitaire player there is definitely a big element of identifying the right move, because you can often know what just the bots are going to do in reaction to your move. When playing human opponents, there's also a decent level of "poo poo I can't let him get this great event" that will influence your thinking. But that said, one of the big advantages that solitaire players have is the ability to do long-term planning. In the long run you have the advantage because you can plan where to build up and concentrate your efforts, which is the kind of thing bot flowcharts are not good at. It kinda makes me want to code an AI for COIN games. COOL CORN posted:The person has a spouse! That's 3! I wish anyone loved me enough to play COINs with me
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 13:42
|
|
|
There are strategic decisions in COIN and it does affect the way you play the game. The issue is that sometimes the optimal strategic direction is not clear, and sometimes it can be hard for beginners to understand which strategic directions are suboptimal are which ones are more favorable to how the faction that they are playing functions. One of the biggest issues that was apparent even with the release of Andean Abyss is the role of the principal insurgent faction, which in the case of Andean Abyss is FARC. I saw a lot of newbies play FARC like they would play any other standard force: attempt to take the government head on and do some damage. The problem with that is that the government is a lot more powerful than you, it can train pretty easily to get troops back, so losing two troops even with an ambush is not a good proposition. When I'm playing a principal insurgent faction (FARC in AA, a combination of M26/Directorio in CL, Taliban in ADP, NLF in FitL etc) you need to understand that the most important part of the game is targeting infrastructure to cut off the government economically and doing as much terror as possible. One thing that Panzeh used to do in AA as FARC was the basis of most of my principal insurgent strats: you go to the roads surrounding cities (for free) to draw out the police/troops, then you jump into the cities and take control of them: if a propaganda is due this can severely stretch the forces of the government and if you take over a city during propaganda, all the nearby roads are auto-sabotaged. It's a strategy that is very annoying for the government to deal with and difficult for them to crush you because it takes so many resources to stop and you have to station lots of police/troops in cities which slows down your countryside pacification campaigns.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:And yeah, I don't get what the difference is between randomly assigning companies that have a preset order to people vs. randomly determining what the order of companies is after people have picked companies. Unless you allow players to specifically pick companies, but that's pretty much the same as allowing players to pick which slot in the turn order they want to be in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Right. Practically it makes no difference. It's only a semantic difference when you advertise your game as completely luck-free. EDIT: Also, there isn't anything lucky or unlucky about last or first in the game. Being last allows you to place your restaurant first. Being first allows you to see where everyone else is going AND also see what their first hire is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 14:06
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:So apparently Quinns did not pull the article on the LoL game due to a conflict of interests, but rather a press embargo and will in fact have it reviewed on his site by a friend. I'm not usually a minis guy myself. I prefer mass/quantity over quality. Now if the minis were made of lead or pewter..... That League of Legends game looks pretty slick though. I'm not much of LoL person myself (why would anyone want to play Warcraft 3 with only one unit?  ) but that board game looks like a frantic multiplayer logic puzzle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Right. Practically it makes no difference. It's only a semantic difference when you advertise your game as completely luck-free. Dice-free, not luck-free. Also, starting turn order isn't lucky or unlucky. The reverse-turn-order initial restaurant placement takes care of that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Now if the minis were made of lead makes a lot of sense now
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
This conversation about FCM and its player order might be the spergiest thing I've ever read in this thread. I played my first ever game of Scythe this week on TTS. Not the best way to learn a game, but it was do-able. I ended up not backing the KS because I stopped buying games sight un-seen for the most part...and I kind of wish I had not backed out now (if only for the stuff). The advertising of 4x is garbage, but I thought the overall gameplay where the threat of combat was more important than actual combat was cool. It helps that I am not a big direct conflict gamer. I came out wanting to play again and see how different factions and approaches play out...but I am not 100% sold on it or sure how much replayability it'll have with my group. Oh yeah, I also totally messed up understanding the scoring and still somehow won...so that was something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Oldstench posted:Dice-free, not luck-free. Also, starting turn order isn't lucky or unlucky. The reverse-turn-order initial restaurant placement takes care of that. The front of the box says "There's no such thing as luck. Skill wins every time." Edit: Note, I'm not complaining about FCM - it's a great game. I did kind of roll my eyes when I read that part though; even if it was true in the sense they intended (ie. the game had no random elements), it's a bit of a wank. It's also ironic, because it comes across as shaming casuals who roll dice and stuff, but they're using a very casual definition of luck. Their game has simultaneous action selection, politics, and tons of past-the-horizon planning - from a Garfieldian (ie. "correct and well thought out") view it has tons of luck (which is fine, games essentially all need luck). VVV: Let Garfield into your heart, man! (Seriously, though, they're using "luck" as the opposite - or complement or something - of "skill" pretty clearly - so they're not just 'not accepting Garfield' like some of you heathen, they're failing to see how randomness and skill aren't the only factors that could decide who wins). And, again, I quite like FCM, I just have a conditioned eye-roll response to this kind of phrase. jmzero fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Sep 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
A lot of board gamers distinguish chaos from luck. Chaos is the unpredictability that comes from other players' surprising decisions and an inability to correctly foresee future game states. Luck is the unpredictability that comes from random elements like dice or card draws.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
jmzero posted:The front of the box says "There's no such thing as luck. Skill wins every time." Don't get too wrapped up in the game's aesthetic. Everything about the presentation nails the style of language it's going for. Imagine if Avalon Hill published this game in the 70s about 50s retro diners, it would totally have "100% DICE FREE" written on the side.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
ChiTownEddie posted:This conversation about FCM and its player order might be the spergiest thing I've ever read in this thread. Pretty much. If player order matters at the beginning of a game that much, that seems to me to be a design flaw. I also hate the "cute" ways many games offer for determining first player, so I typically just use this app which randomly selects a finger on put on the screen (it can even be used for random teams). Though personally, I don't mind "luck" in games all the time, at least when there is some way to mitigate that luck. Unfortunately, actively mitigating a games' luck mechanic can get you targeted by players who don't.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
me posted:So I'm sitting at over 130 responses between you guys and BGG, and my professor had been saying we needed 30-60 at minimum, so thank you all a stupid large amount for making me look good for this class. As an addendum, yeah, I kind of goofed on the ordering of the responses to the two matrix questions because I was spending more time panicking than thinking, unfortunately. That being said, no seriously you all are lifesavers (I mean, not literally, but like figuratively literally)..
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
foxxtrot posted:Pretty much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 16:38
|
|