|
I've been playing Warriors of God and Warriors of Japan, two light wargames from the same designer, both published by MMP. They are very interesting games with some serious flaws. Warriors of God covers the Hundred Years War in Europe. Players control England or France and compete for victory primarily by controlling territory (you also get points for killing or imprisoning enemy nobles). Nobles act as your generals, moving troops around the map and commanding them in battle. Without generals troops can't do anything, and in fact they usually disband. There are a few different kinds of troops (Knights, archers,mercenaries and siege cannon) but most are generic. Some clever mechanics give the game color: each turn you get a few more nobles (who can enter the map almost anywhere), and your old nobles roll to see if they have died of age or misfortune. Any noble may command leaderless troops. This means that it's possible to have Richard III commanding a large English army in Flanders, then he dies of the plague and a French general pops up and takes command of his troops. Nobles get rated for importance as well as combat ability, so it's possible to have an extremely high noble (the king, in many cases), who commands many troops but is a terrible general. If he's on the field when your opponent attacks you have no choice but to put him in charge of the battle, which will not go well. Both sides roll large numbers of dice in combat. Other than making sure that you have a larger army and a better commander there's no room for tactics, it's just seeing who can roll the best. Retreat lets the enemy take a free shot and disgraces your commander, which means he won't have an effect on area control at the end of the turn - this makes it rather unattractive. From turn to turn the game is always interesting and exciting, presenting tough decisions and giving opportunity for surprise and cleverness. The area control aspect coupled with the release of new nobles every turn was always engaging. On the other hand it's filled with random elements that limit planning. The design seems to be groping towards something smart without actually getting there. Warriors of Japan uses the same system, with a few modifications, in a game based on warfare in 14th century Japan (the rise of the Ashikaga shogunate). I have less to say about this game because it does much less than Warriors of God - there are fewer rules, the map is smaller, and play generally moves much faster. In Warriors of Japan you command samurai who are almost comically treacherous - any samurai below the highest rank can be convinced to switch sides during a battle, sometimes twice in a row.There's no system to mark this on the game board so things quickly become confusing. Troops in Warriors of Japan are entirely generic (just represented by numbers) and combat is once again both sides rolling lots of dice. The area control aspect is still there, as is the once per turn deployment of nobles, but the map is very small so this part of the game feels less like an opportunity for interesting strategy and more like an exercise is doing yourself the least possible harm. You get a small number of samurai deployments every turn, and some of these will almost always move a leader into well defended enemy territory, which usually means his death or rout. Again, it seems like the designer was moving towards something pretty great, between a euro-style game, a traditional wargame, and an abstract game (the treacherous samurai made me think of drops in Shogi), but the he hasn't quite gotten there. Sekigahara seems like a fully developed, well balanced take on the same idea. Both games have decent components (large, beautifully decorated cardboard chits and glossy paper maps) and very good manuals.
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
Might take Cuba Libre to the table for the first time tonight, depending how many people show up for game night. I've worked through the demo game in the playbook and it seems to make some degree of sense - any other tips for making sense of it the first time?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
pumpinglemma posted:You're in for a fun ride. So am I the only one who is going to by a grand total of four boxes of pandemic legacy (two for each season) so that I can put the box art together for a cool wall piece?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:Might take Cuba Libre to the table for the first time tonight, depending how many people show up for game night. I've worked through the demo game in the playbook and it seems to make some degree of sense - any other tips for making sense of it the first time? You can do worse than explaining it in the order it is in the manual, since it starts with the simplest information and moves to higher level stuff: this is the board (provinces, cities, ECs). These are the pieces (bases, forces, what does Underground mean). These are important game concepts (Support, Control, Resources). This is how turns work (Events vs Ops, Eligibility). Then explain the Propaganda card, since it has "how do I win?" starting things off. And then you can go into their actions, since they now can see how that might fit into how they win.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
The crib sheets are so good that I think the best thing to do is explain the basic concepts like homullus said (map, turn structure, events, propaganda) then jump right into the game. When a player's turn comes up ask them what they want to accomplish and then point them to their crib sheet to accomplish it. Often it's just taking the event but basics like move/attack/pursuing victory condition are questions most people will ask and once they've done it a few times the wider concept of the game becomes apparent. "I'm 26 July and I want opposition how do I get that?" "Use the terror action. Read your sheet and execute." "Okay to terrorize I need underground guerrillas and it shifts support. But my starting guerrillas aren't in any areas that really hurt the Government. So instead of terrorizing I want to begin expanding West."
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
theroachman posted:Except in MK you build a deck of action cards with various effects (movement, damage, block, diplomacy, mana) while in Gloomhaven you build a deck with numerical modifiers and multipliers that get applied as damage in combat. There's two card pools in Gloomhaven, your modifier deck and your action cards. Your modifier deck gets better as you complete battle objectives. Increasing your level gives you access to better action cards. It's not really deckbuilding for action cards, because you don't have an action deck, just a hand of cards that you'll discard and recover over the scenario. You also get to choose which of the available action cards you bring along to any given scenario, at no point are action cards drawn randomly. While it's not a 1-to-1 map to Mage Knight, I'd say the hand management combat is a lot closer to MK's style than it is to Descent's.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
Has anyone had a chance to play the expansion for Betrayal yet? I'm curious to know if it's worth the money and if the new haunts are well thought out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
Just leaving this here
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
Gilgameshback posted:
Both of these sound interesting and they're both time periods I enjoy reading about - the comically treacherous nature of the nobility in 14th century is 100% historically accurate (although they didn't see it as treacherous but that's talk for another thread) and I can imagine that tracking the board state without some sort of marker for this is difficult. Thanks for bringing this up I might look into these.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Just leaving this here You may as well have made the article link clickable: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/07/magazine/letter-of-complaint-cards-against-humanity.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0 I can't decide if this person enjoys playing the game or hates that people enjoy playing it having some stupid rear end sense of superiority.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
al-azad posted:You make it sound easier than it actually is. Going into someone's territory requires a move or an invade, you're at the mercy of the person already there can initiate the pillage. Everyone wants the track bumps so starting a pillage will just draw another player which may be a fight you know you can't win. The Ragnarok territory isn't necessarily a target at the start of an age, it becomes a spot you fill in towards the end as the number of dudes winds down. Ideally you want it locked down in the previous Age to prevent new people moving in, but this isn't efficient because of the unit limitations. Was this perhaps a game of Bloodrage you played at Spiel Essen with first time players?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Essen Loot: My part of the loot: Fight for Olympus Figment Doctor Who Time Clash Potion Explosion Simurgh + expansion (Call of the Dragonlord) Heavy Steam Thoughts? Which games would you have avoided? Which one should I start with?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Pennfalath posted:Essen Loot: My Codenames Pictures is signed by Vlaadaa 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
OperaMouse posted:My Codenames Pictures is signed by Vlaadaa They were really the nicest people to talk to!
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
I'd be curious about fight for Olympus. Also, any Essen people have adrenaline impressions?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
Pennfalath posted:Essen Loot: All of them except Simurgh, which doesn't need expanding. Re: Adrenaline - we were seeing it constantly in people's bags, but only once on a table. We couldn't even begin to figure out what was happening just by watching and it's really garish so we didn't want to watch for long. I don't have a photo of my Spiel loot, but it was: A Feast for Odin The Great Zimbabwe Ave Roma Mea Culpa Colony Vinhos Deluxe Valley of the Kings: Last Rites Love Letter Premium (I didn't own Love Letter before) Noxford Capital Lux Tallinn Orleans: Trade and Intrigue ONUW: Daybreak Celestia: A Little Help
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
Pennfalath posted:Essen Loot: Let me know your thoughts on Fight for Olympus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
lockdar posted:Was this perhaps a game of Bloodrage you played at Spiel Essen with first time players? No, with friends of equal experience. Why did you end up in a first time Blood Rage game at Essen and someone came from behind with an astonishing victory? Or was there someone as table-flipping angry as me about it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:So, less important? Or were you answering to Beffer? Yes was replying to Beffer, but I do agree that it seems less important in Gloomhaven. In any case, I'm looking forward to playing it. On the subject of co-op dungeon crawlers with deck building, I got a rules rundown for Aeons End at Essen and no sir, I didn't like it. It's basically Dominion deck building versus a LOTR quest. It sounds awesome but it doesn't seem to work very well. There's a kingdom consisting of a few currency cards, spells, and items. There's a basic kingdom setup but there are also a few stacks of alternative kingdom cards in the box so you can vary setup. During their turn, players build their decks by buying cards from the kingdom. They can also play cards from their deck to deal with threats in a card row that the monster fills by flipping over a card from the monster deck during its turn. The cards in the row generally have a countdown for when they are going to resolve, but some happen immediately. Players don't shuffle their deck. They just flip over their discard deck and this becomes their new deck. The idea is that this would allow you to 'weave' your deck for the next time you go through it, reducing randomness. Except there is no way to predict what you will need the next time, as the monster deck is still random. theroachman fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Oct 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
How do you all think Codenames would do as a play-by-post game? I think it would lend itself to it very well with teams of five or so. I'm thinking about possibly setting one up in the other forum.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
Capsaicin posted:How do you all think Codenames would do as a play-by-post game? I think it would lend itself to it very well with teams of five or so. I'm thinking about possibly setting one up in the other forum. There was a thread for a few games! Feel completely free. My recollection is that the two spymasters really need to be on top of things because they can help run the game (since they know literally everything the GM knows).
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
Capsaicin posted:How do you all think Codenames would do as a play-by-post game? I think it would lend itself to it very well with teams of five or so. I'm thinking about possibly setting one up in the other forum. There was a thread that survived for some time so it will clearly work, just make sure you get responsive players and shepherd them hard because the game's much better at a faster pace.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:The "How to teach" part of the Mastermind's Handbook is pretty OK, IIRC. The first tragedy has detailed information for the Masterming on how to win it while teaching the Protagonists different concepts (basically because they lose each day in a different way) Thanks for this! Actually seeing it this succinctly helps a lot. Also thank you for the advice AMooseDoesStuff I will probably try that! Maybe run a first steps with just the SO and I, and then a second one with our group when teaching them how to play. So, for Tragedy Looper, do games really last 2 hours like the box says? Or is the entirely dependent on how many people are playing/the scenario in play?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Capsaicin posted:How do you all think Codenames would do as a play-by-post game? I think it would lend itself to it very well with teams of five or so. I'm thinking about possibly setting one up in the other forum. We actually had two different threads that survived for a while, Gutter Owl ran the first one and I ran the second one. I think both threads died because she and I ran out of free time. If you have archives, you could go look for them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
bean mug posted:Thanks for this! Actually seeing it this succinctly helps a lot. Also thank you for the advice AMooseDoesStuff I will probably try that! Maybe run a first steps with just the SO and I, and then a second one with our group when teaching them how to play. It's pretty accurate, though I found restricting conversation except between time loops speeds up the game significantly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
ETB posted:It's pretty accurate, though I found restricting conversation except between time loops speeds up the game significantly. Isn't that a rule though? I mean, that makes sense, and explains why I couldn't really imagine the game taking 2 hours if people are only communicating between loops.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
bean mug posted:Isn't that a rule though? I mean, that makes sense, and explains why I couldn't really imagine the game taking 2 hours if people are only communicating between loops. It really depends on the complexity and length of the scenario. Some might go over, some might go under. Technically, table talk during time loops is an optional rule, though I think it's generally agreed the game is much better if it's restricted to only between loops.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Re: Adrenaline - we were seeing it constantly in people's bags, but only once on a table. We couldn't even begin to figure out what was happening just by watching and it's really garish so we didn't want to watch for long. If it looked differently it might have been a blind buy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
How does 1846 compare to Steam? My understanding is that Steam is more about connecting/delivering, while 18xx is more about stock shenanigans, but 1846 is less stock-y or something? And I guess Chicago Express fits into the middle somewhere?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
Played some games while watching football today: Forge War: Played the four player short game which took around 2.5 hours. Everyone seemed to enjoy it, and I can see how it's all supposed to fit together. However, I failed to get any of the systems working together and ended up with half the score of the winner. The mining section at the beginning of each round is clever, and it feels great jumping a supervisor over a bunch of workers and switching them all to your own color. Council of Verona: It's a very short game which is the best thing I can say about it. Thunder Alley: We played on the Verghn's Grove road course which is very tight with the majority of the track being only two lanes. Everyone picked it up quickly and seemed to enjoy it. I would not pick that course for a learning game again as it leads to a lot of really long snakes that can be difficult to break up depending on the cards dealt. Final scores were 159, 150, 140, and 130 with no one pitting the entire race. Interested in trying my copy of Grand Prix now to see how it addresses more technical courses. Tiny Epic Galaxies: Really fun time waster. First time playing with more than two players, and it is much more engaging with four. I got one rule wrong as I dealt out planets as player count +1, when it is supposed to be player count +2, I don't think it would have had a major impact though. Excited for the expansion now, but it will really increase table space which was the major reason I picked up the base game in the first place, as it was small enough to play on a place between two tray tables.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
I really enjoy Forge War; hilariously it's not a game about pretending to stab monsters in the face, it's a game about pretending you're the accountants managing the people who stab monsters in the face. How dorky is that? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:How does 1846 compare to Steam? My understanding is that Steam is more about connecting/delivering, while 18xx is more about stock shenanigans, but 1846 is less stock-y or something? And I guess Chicago Express fits into the middle somewhere? Wizard Styles fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Oct 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:How does 1846 compare to Steam? My understanding is that Steam is more about connecting/delivering, while 18xx is more about stock shenanigans, but 1846 is less stock-y or something? And I guess Chicago Express fits into the middle somewhere? 18xx more generally is about investors (the players) investing in and running railroad companies, as distinct entities. 1846 is more of a run good companies game compared to, say 1830, but that doesn't mean you can ignore the stock market. CE is completely different from 18xx design wise, other than the fact that they both have train companies and stocks, but there are similarities in the type of long term decisions and shifting incentives players have to consider.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
Wizard Styles posted:Steam without the expansion doesn't have a stock market. I have never played an 18XX, so don't know how these games compare, but if you want a train game with a stock market, you'll need the Steam Barons expansion in addition to base Steam. Or Age of Steam, which as far as I know is a slightly grognardier Steam. Steam comes with the AoS rules, but they're not stock markety at all (like you said, you'd need the expansion). I'm not a huge fan of the Steam Barons expansion, I'd probably just play Chicago Express at that point (or take the step up to an entry level 18xx like 1889 or 1846).
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 05:36
|
|
|
al-azad posted:No, with friends of equal experience. Why did you end up in a first time Blood Rage game at Essen and someone came from behind with an astonishing victory? Or was there someone as table-flipping angry as me about it? The situation you described was shockingly familiar to my first game of Bloodrage at Essen yesterday, one guy drafted all the "loosing matters" cards and ran away with the game at the end of the second era. It was fun to see but frustrating because the 2 people to his right (who could prevent him from getting those cards in the second era) did nothing about it. Loved the game but holy poo poo it's 100 euro...
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 07:50
|
|
|
lockdar posted:The situation you described was shockingly familiar to my first game of Bloodrage at Essen yesterday, one guy drafted all the "loosing matters" cards and ran away with the game at the end of the second era. It was fun to see but frustrating because the 2 people to his right (who could prevent him from getting those cards in the second era) did nothing about it. Loved the game but holy poo poo it's 100 euro... Blood Rage was selling for €79 at at least one stand.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 08:27
|
|
|
Did anyone manage to play that Arkham card game?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 10:35
|
|
|
lockdar posted:The situation you described was shockingly familiar to my first game of Bloodrage at Essen yesterday, one guy drafted all the "loosing matters" cards and ran away with the game at the end of the second era. It was fun to see but frustrating because the 2 people to his right (who could prevent him from getting those cards in the second era) did nothing about it. Loved the game but holy poo poo it's 100 euro... Had a blast with Blood Rage over the weekend again. Whole story on the last few pages just shows what happens if someone gets to pick what he wanted completely uncontested. Why fight everyone else if you can just score points by being ignored? Smart move. Ofcourse he isn't going to join in on more fights if he gets crushed doing just that the age before. Same with the re-pillage card and the one that allows you to sacrifice men for better stats. If someone sits in a corner repeating one of those moves you either rush to end the age by pillaging all zones or contest their re-pillage, don't just let them sit there simply because he isn't fighting you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 11:03
|
|
|
the panacea posted:Did anyone manage to play that Arkham card game? FFG had it in their display case along with Eldritch Horror: The Dreamlands, but I don't think it was being demonstrated. What I do know is that it's only for 1 or 2 players.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 11:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
T-Bone posted:Steam comes with the AoS rules, but they're not stock markety at all (like you said, you'd need the expansion). I'm not a huge fan of the Steam Barons expansion, I'd probably just play Chicago Express at that point (or take the step up to an entry level 18xx like 1889 or 1846). In what way is 1846 a step "up" from Chicago Express? If Steam is a satisfying game in its own right, I won't miss the stock market at all. 1846 is probably at my ceiling for stock market tolerance; it seems like a satisfying mechanic, but maybe a bit too fiddly with moving all that cash around. I'm not looking for a game where I can short-sell opponents into bankruptcy or whatever it is people do in those games.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 13:06
|
|