|
Chomp8645 posted:Between "I can't win, I will attack whoever is in 1st place" or "I can't win, I will attack whoever will net me the most points/benefit" I really can't fault a person for going with either. Both are legitimate. Asking them to just shut down and no longer affect the game space just because they can't win is not reasonable in my opinion. And that's ignoring that fact that it is very common for players to think that another player (or themselves) can't win when they absolutely still can. There is also the moral grey option of "I can't win, I will pursue a vendetta against whoever knocked me out of the running". Nobody's really blaming the players here, except in cases where they are just legitimately being vindictive idiots (like the revenge or "ending the game" options above, or the very real "I'm going to do idiot poo poo to be wacky" option). It's more how much the design of the game does to mitigate kingmaking, so someone who is legitimately playing well is just dogpiled and loses because they happened to be in first/made their own legitimate play to knock someone out when someone else decided to king make (or be target of wacky guy by looking in his direction or something).
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:10 |
|
|
I do not believe that "emptying a stack in Dominion" and "popping Imperium Rex when you are the loser" are remotely comparable. The former is an expected Game End condition that also increases the score of the person executing the action. The latter completely breaks the intended flow of the game and yields no points to the person executing the action. e: this is not a response to the above post. Meme Poker Party fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Jan 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:"I'm going to do idiot poo poo to be wacky" OK - yeah - this is the one guy who actually kills me. Screw you, wacky guy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
i once scored my 6th star in scythe because i thought i was winning but i wasn't turns out im just a dirty rotten kingmaker
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Big Ol Marsh Pussy posted:i once scored my 6th star in scythe because i thought i was winning but i wasn't turns out im just a dirty rotten kingmaker This is why I hate small world.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:except in cases where they are just legitimately being vindictive idiots
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:If you made it so another player still exists in the game but now doesn't have any chance of winning, you should assume that his main objective is now to drag you down with him. Yeah except I had a friend who got mad because someone attacked him in Cosmic Encounter - a game where a random deck decides who you attack
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:This is why I hate small world. I usually hate hidden but traceable information, but then I think how my games of Puerto Rico end up with 4-5 point difference and what would it be to be able to count every single point and barrel before taking the final move and I'm not so sure anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:Yeah except I had a friend who got mad because someone attacked him in Cosmic Encounter - a game where a random deck decides who you attack Don't play games with this person.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Japanese Dating Sim posted:Don't play Cosmic Encounter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Players being able to end a game once they are completely out of the running sounds like a feature. It prevents players from dog-piling on whoever is in the weakest position unless they are ready to win.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Dominion is cursed in terms of online implementations. I got an e-mail that I could import my old account into the new version. It had some random apologies... whatever, I clicked on it. My browser spun for a good 30 seconds, then hung on a picture of some random cart art with no interface. The second time I tried, it worked and I was able to register my new account. I started a bot game. It seemed to be working (though watching the card art slowly pop in kind of made me curious about their web development skills) until it randomly returned me to the "register a new account screen" a minute later. I exited and logged in again straight to dominion.games. I was able to return to my game in progress... but again, it keeps sending me back to the login screen every minute or so. OK, so I logged in again in a new browser, and it's still sending me back to login. Also, there's a gameplay thing I have no idea how to deal with. I'm playing a board with Governor, and so I bought some Governors. But in my current hand, I'm already at 8 coins and so I don't want to play another Governor (obviously) - but it won't let me stop playing actions and play coins. Nothing in the interface is giving me any clues on this. And now I'm back on the login screen. Wow. Edit: game seems to work better for me in Firefox (as opposed to Chrome). Still rough, but it's not putting me back to the login screen every minute. jmzero fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Jan 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
jmzero posted:Dominion is cursed in terms of online implementations. On the flipside, I logged in perfectly. New implementation is rough but better than the old one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
The speed of the game now is isotropic speed. Much better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:A single kingmaking decision is an unfortunate circumstance in a lot of games, but a kingmaking strategy is pretty much the result of a lovely person. King making is a valuable meta-strategy, it allows you to modify future games to your advantage! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:I do not believe that "emptying a stack in Dominion" and "popping Imperium Rex when you are the loser" are remotely comparable. The former is an expected Game End condition that also increases the score of the person executing the action. The latter completely breaks the intended flow of the game and yields no points to the person executing the action. Emptying a stack in Dominion only increases your score if the stack you're emptying carries VP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:Players being able to end a game once they are completely out of the running sounds like a feature. It prevents players from dog-piling on whoever is in the weakest position unless they are ready to win. I agree, but I also agree that people aren't necessarily good at knowing when they're out of the running, particularly in the "cult of the new" board game scene a lot of us are a part of where you'll play a game 3-4 times ever since someone always brings their latest, sexiest purchase and wants to play it. I don't really know what to do about this issue in a broad sense, but I think it's something individual games and designers can address while working out mechanics and scoring systems.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:Players being able to end a game once they are completely out of the running sounds like a feature. It prevents players from dog-piling on whoever is in the weakest position unless they are ready to win. It's like overtime rules in the NFL. They're kinda stupid and grossly favor the team who won the coin toss, but hey, you had the other 60 minutes where you could have won the game!
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
In an effort to get my son to unhook from electronics, we're committing to playing a board game every night after school / work and marking it off on a calendar he received for Christmas. With that in mind yesterday I stopped off at the used board game store yesterday and picked up a couple things. For myself, I grabbed Tash Kalar (only $30CDN, though it's been played). I'm really excited to play this and hope to get a game in tonight against my brother. I was also considering getting Titan (also $30) or TI: Rex ($25) but finally decided against both because I have no idea when I'd actually get them to the table. The idea of getting Titan is kind of running through my mind though, despite that. For my son, I grabbed Micro Mutants: Evolution for $5. It's the only dexterity games that we own, basically a tiddly-winks variant that pits bug armies against one another. It's pretty fun! Last night we played with myself, my son, and my brother using the basic rules and only a single capture for each base (normally bases need to be captured twice to be defeated). The biggest issue, other than just getting used to playing this type of game, was that the playmat was creased from being inside the board. I'm going to iron it out, roll it, and store it separately from the box. If we like the game enough I may actually switch the entire box over to a rolled chess style box instead, but we'll see how it goes before I commit to that. Trying to decide what to play tonight... if my brother wants to join I might try Mermaid Rain, which would be our first attempt at it. If he doesn't, my son and I will probably play Sherwood Showdown. It has some rules printed on the cards that he'll need help with, but the rest of the game is a pretty straightforward card game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
Wait Amazon, you said The Colonists wasn't going to ship until the 8th! It's arriving Friday, I'm skiing this weekend you jerks!
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
Anyone had experience playing the newer edition of Through the Ages? The host of our gaming group LOVES this game...unnaturally so (he claims it's because he hates the randomness of dice, and this game has no dice.) We've played a shitton of the original, and yet I think in the span of a couple years, we only ever managed to play two games 100% by the rules...it seems there was always some rule we misinterpreted, or didn't notice, or forgot about. Though in our defense, it has a terrible rule book. Which does bring me to my first positive about the second edition - a REAL rule book that doesn't rely on you remembering whether a rule is from the simple, advanced, or full version of the game. Just simply laid out in turn order. And then an addition book to go over a sample game is helpful as well. Other things I appreciate in the new version: Corruption occurring first, so that you'll always end your turn with some ore (assuming you have workers on the mines, and why wouldn't you unless it's the final turn and you need to move them to culture tech?) Several leaders and wonders getting tweaked. The Michelangelo + Basilica combo is still powerful, but not nearly as much as in the first edition. Churchill is actually useful now. The "get back an action for playing a leader when you replace one" rule. Encourages actually swapping a guy out before the age ends. I know that, for me at least, I'd sometimes get stuck in a rut with a given leader and be too focused on his ability and not branch out to something else, like someone giving me a science boost, so I don't focus on culture. Things I don't care for: Military can still be too lopsided. Yes, they tried to address this by eliminating sacrificing units for double strength, and opening up tactics, and even allowing any military card to be discarded for a +1 defense bonus, but that's only up to the # of military actions a player has. If they aren't going to be military-focused, then that's likely only 2 or 3, and maybe they'll survive that first aggression by doing that, but if someone is that much stronger than them, they can still play aggression after aggression on them if they keep lucking into drawing them. Not to mention it appears (though maybe I'm wrong) that there are even more events that are rewarding a high military and punishing a low one. Related to above, there's still too much of "the rich get richer." Too many events that are along the lines of "the strongest gets X and the weakest loses Y." or "The player with the most culture points gets even MORE culture points." And also the drat game still takes like 3 hours.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
I mean. Civ games are usually pretty long. At least it's not The Colonists' 8 hours?  And yeah, military's still important, in the sense of "family growth is important in agricola". You could win without focusing on it, but you're probably not going to win if you completely ignore it. It's a lot, lot harder to be screwed out of military, it's just that it means if you're getting whaled on it's probably (not definitely, probably) your fault, not random tactic draws.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
It took 9 hours to play one of the Mansions of Madness scenarios
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
The answer to all of this kingmaking is clearly player elimination 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Gonna try and get the AFfO topic up and running um... tomorrow, with a new challenge! I've got one ruminating but since I've been kind of sick I've been slothing it up. My copy of Sushi Go! Party is so lonely though, I read through the rules and looked at all the cute faces on the sushi but haven't played it yet  How is it 2-player? Maybe I can rope my girl into playing a few rounds tonight..
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
This talk of kingmaking does kind of bring up the question of how do you avoid the issue when designing a game? Obviously most people here don't want to kingmake, aside from a few malevolent souls lurking around, but in general it's a lovely position to be placed in. Some games you can't just pass, so unless you take a move that is obviously disadvantageous to you and allow the contenders to play it out without your explicit interference (which seems to also go against the spirit of the game as well, taking a dive in a sense) is there anything else you can do from a player's perspective aside from just going forward with your moves as if you weren't losing? VVV Power Grid is quite fun and plays really quickly when you know what's going on but as with most auction games, it rewards higher play counts. I've read that it can get a runaway leader problem but I've never encountered it yet. FulsomFrank fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Jan 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
Oh, I didn't want this to get lost in my TTA rambling, but Power Grid...good game?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
DrBouvenstein posted:Oh, I didn't want this to get lost in my TTA rambling, but Power Grid...good game? One of my favorites. Power Grid is really good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
I think any game where it becomes a constant and big problem is an inherently flawed design. With that said, a lot of games really appeal to a huge audience where this is a problem, and you can't get rid of it without drastically changing the design. I think Inis makes the best stab at fixing this problem by creating three quite separate win conditions. You're never really "out" of the game, and you're always going to stay motivated until the game ends to try to claw out one of those victory conditions for yourself. Still, unfortunately, you can accidentally king-make someone by playing sub-optimally. Or you could decide you're out (when you're really not) and be a dick and king-make. I don't think there could really be a 2+-player game game without player elimination where you entirely eliminate the problem, but it's cool to see some games coming up with legit ways to at least mitigate it as much as possible. A lot of euro games just bypass this by having scoring "hidden" until the end of the game, but that's really more of a patch than a solution to the problem.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:This talk of kingmaking does kind of bring up the question of how do you avoid the issue when designing a game? Obviously most people here don't want to kingmake, aside from a few malevolent souls lurking around, but in general it's a lovely position to be placed in. Some games you can't just pass, so unless you take a move that is obviously disadvantageous to you and allow the contenders to play it out without your explicit interference (which seems to also go against the spirit of the game as well, taking a dive in a sense) is there anything else you can do from a player's perspective aside from just going forward with your moves as if you weren't losing? Generally I think the best approach is try to keep the game as competitive as possible to minimize the chances that someone winds up facing a hopeless decision. There's a bit of a balancing act here because you don't want players to wind up too deep in the hole, but you also want players to feel rewarded for strong early play instead of having the game always be decided in the last 5 minutes independently of everything that happened up until then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:This talk of kingmaking does kind of bring up the question of how do you avoid the issue when designing a game? Obviously most people here don't want to kingmake, aside from a few malevolent souls lurking around, but in general it's a lovely position to be placed in. Some games you can't just pass, so unless you take a move that is obviously disadvantageous to you and allow the contenders to play it out without your explicit interference (which seems to also go against the spirit of the game as well, taking a dive in a sense) is there anything else you can do from a player's perspective aside from just going forward with your moves as if you weren't losing? Hiding when the game will end ("I couldn't know for sure the game would end that turn") and hiding some of the point scoring or victory conditions can hinder kingmaking. A large enough lead and/or logical deduction can still put such a game back into transparent kingmaking mode though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
angel opportunity posted:I don't think there could really be a 2+-player game game without player elimination where you entirely eliminate the problem, but it's cool to see some games coming up with legit ways to at least mitigate it as much as possible. Player elimination is really not a fix for the problem; if anything, kingmaking seems noticeably worse for me in player elimination games. I have nothing to lose, might as well go out with a bang, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
It's worse than you think. It was a 4p game. I was Jinteki with Globalsec as my rival, P2 was Haas-Bioroid with NBN as his rival, P3 was Globalsec with Jinteki as his rival, and P4 was the Federalist. I knew P3 and P4's rivals from the first round just due to watching them play. I eventually passed Thomas Haas to Globalsec so he'd swap his rival card out and be willing to work with me to stop the Federalist. The Federalist's turn was last, and he proposed an offer that would tank the game for everybody else. HB popped the card that made him tell us what he was going to do with his offer. Then, after having it publicly confirmed that I was correct all game long about P4 being Fed, HB dumped his entire hand to vote for his proposal because he thinks it's funny to act like an rear end in a top hat. I'm probably never going to play a game with him again, if I can help it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
DrBouvenstein posted:Oh, I didn't want this to get lost in my TTA rambling, but Power Grid...good game? Power Grid seems fine mechanically, but I find it dull as dirt to actually play.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:14
|
|
|
It's me, I am the Eldritch Horror fanboy. I even preordered something at at FLGS for the first time, the new Dreamlands expansion coming out tomorrow, because it was a hobby store full of fat old people who care about different model paints, and yet they were playing Black Sabbath over the store radio. Hey, I'm new to all this. Do fat old model-painting people secretly... rule?? They weren't playing it this time I went, but I have to support my FLGS just in case this is a thing. This place is where I get my games now. e: also I thought these places were supposed to be more expensive than Amazon, but it was like $15 cheaper. gently caress Amazon, they can't even find my house sometimes, and I've been feeling bad for not buying local + supporting Amazon's business practices. Ragnar34 fucked around with this message at 23:30 on Jan 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:Power Grid seems fine mechanically, but I find it dull as dirt to actually play. Yeah it's a right group thing. If you enjoy staring at a board while thinking really hard for 2 hours and doing a ton of maths in your head power grid owns. If you have people that suffer from analysis paralysis or you like social games or you hate running the numbers power grid sucks. I love it but there is one guy I avoid playing it with because the play time doubles.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
Ragnar34 posted:It's me, I am the Eldritch Horror fanboy. I even preordered something at at FLGS for the first time, the new Dreamlands expansion coming out tomorrow, because it was a hobby store full of fat old people who care about different model paints, and yet they were playing Black Sabbath over the store radio. Hey, I'm new to all this. Do fat old model-painting people secretly... rule?? it's you, you are the fat old model-painting people
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
Kingmaking, like quarterbacking, is not a game design flaw. It's a player flaw.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
Power Grid is also one of the purest auction games I've seen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:10 |
|
|
CaptainRightful posted:Kingmaking, like quarterbacking, is not a game design flaw. It's a player flaw. I disagree.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 23:46
|
|