|
BL hates Yomi too so it's not actually surprising and I'm just going to disregard it. Edit: Wait no, I'm confusing him with someone I had slapfights over Yomi like years ago. Sorry, BL! Siivola fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Feb 6, 2017 |
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:27 |
|
|
Well what game did Sirlin rip off this time? Why not just play that instead, they're usually better designed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Magic, and also no they aren't.  Edit: Okay so Magic has some legit design talent being poured into it, but I don't do drugs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Thanks for the Tigris & Euphrates videos, those helped. What's recommended in the way of expansions for Eldritch Horror? I know Forsaken Lore is basically considered to be mandatory, but as for the others: I've gathered that the general consensus is Pyramids > Mountains and Remnants > Carcosa, but I'd be interested to know particularly why (or whether one of the big boxes is even a better value than both the small boxes). I'm curious about Dreamlands in particular - it looks the most interesting in theme, but since it's still so new it's hard to find a lot of impressions of it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Siivola posted:BL hates Yomi too so it's not actually surprising and I'm just going to disregard it. Nah, BL totally hates Yomi too. I will effortpost after a shower. Tide yourself over with this and this, if you like. gutterdaughter fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Feb 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
Codex takes everything that Magic does well, cuts out all the poo poo that Magic does poorly, and splices in the best pieces of both deckbuilding and RTS games. Except for art and flavor, MTG has these in spades where Codex is largely mediocre and uninspired. It's also a fiddly mess with lots of little bits to track and remember, and the rulebook has a number of things that are pretty confusing if you're not already familiar with the games it's borrowing from. Gripes aside, I like Codex a lot and heartily recommend it. Once you get past the presentation and rulebook, the game underneath there is pretty drat fantastic with a ton of variety in each match-up and so many interesting decisions to make every turn. In Magic you build a deck that does one thing really well, then you shuffle it up and hope you draw the right cards so that you can actually do that thing. It is very common to have one or fewer playable cards in hand on a given turn and it's rare to have reason not to play that card. Codex works very differently. You start the game with a deck of ten cards, all ten of which can be played and are useful from turn 1. Every turn you have to decide which cards to play and which cards to turn into land-equivalents, permanently removing them from your deck. At the end of each turn you discard your hand and draw a new one, giving you a completely new set of options for the next turn, then you look through your "codex" and add any two cards you like to your deck, allowing you to pivot into a large number of potential strategies mid-game. Codex also takes some of the things magic does well and just does them better. For example, deciding when to attack with your creatures in Magic can be a very interesting decision; you need to weigh the relative values of dealing damage to your opponent, potentially leaving yourself open to attack, and whatever the result of your opponent blocking might be. In Codex, you put your blockers in one of five different slots, each giving the creature a different bonus, and the attacker gets to decide which creature he wants to attack. In this way, the attacker has more options in how they attack AND the defender has more options in how they defend. Codex also adds heroes, which are clearly taken right out of Warcraft 3, but are also directly analagous to a fusion of MTG commanders and planeswalkers: powerful options that you always have access to that grow more threatening the longer they stay on the board. Starting with such a small deck and adding to/removing from it brings in a lot of the same strategies you find in deckbuilders. Having stuff on the board means you won't draw it, so there's an extra layer of consideration whenever you could kill something. Having a small deck that cycles makes things quite predictable; you know when you'll draw a specific card, give or take a turn or two, and can plan around that. From RTS's you get some really interesting strategic concerns around build orders. Cards added to your deck from your codex aren't seen by your opponent until you play them, but if you can accurately predict what direction your opponent is heading then you can have the right counter ready ahead of time. Further, in order to play the strongest cards you have to divert resources to required prerequisites; these prerequisites don't do anything by themselves, so you're effectively handing your opponent a resource advantage that they can try to leverage to end the game before your more powerful cards hit the table. Codex has problems, but overall it's pretty drat great, if you have any interest at all then definitely check it out. I'm really looking forward to the digital implementation, the game was designed from the ground up to play asynchronously with that in mind, but I haven't heard any news about it and Sirlin seems to be focused on Fantasy Strike for the time being, so who knows when that'll actually be a thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Fenn the Fool! posted:In Magic you build a deck that does one thing really well, then you shuffle it up and hope you draw the right cards so that you can actually do that thing. It is very common to have one or fewer playable cards in hand on a given turn and it's rare to have reason not to play that card. Ah so he ripped off Mage Wars. It's understandable that no one noticed, I dont think anyone played Mage Wars  Honestly Codex sounds way too fiddly to me. One of Magics biggest strengths is its portability. You can carry around a deck of MtG cards and a D20 in your pocket, and play it almost anywhere with a flat surface. Codex has all kinds of tokens and boards and whatever. It might "technically" be a better game on paper, but in practice no one will play that poo poo if they have to cart around a big box everywhere. Same reason Mage Wars doesn't work 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:Thanks for the Tigris & Euphrates videos, those helped. Small boxes offer an extra GOO, four Investigators and a bit of stuffing for the existing decks. Large boxes offer twice as much stuff plus an extra side-board designed to be used with a specific GOO and otherwise only used occasionally with a Prelude card. In a nutshell, a large box is two small boxes with one "enhanced" adventure. I have Dreamlands, but I only got it last week and I haven't skinned it yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
Fenn the Fool! posted:Codex takes everything that Magic does well, cuts out all the poo poo that Magic does poorly, and splices in the best pieces of both deckbuilding and RTS games. <snip> ...well I've been beaten by a county mile. Yes, this. Codex is most of the things I enjoyed about Magic, minus most of the things that I couldn't stand about Magic, with the gaps patched over with Dominion. (Minus, y'know, flavor and creativity. But we ARE talking about a Sirlin game.) Let me expand, then. Here's a grand list of everything Codex does better than Magic. A) Removes the mana screw problem. Honestly, this isn't a super laudable achievement. Magic's land system is an awful 90s anachronism. You know it, I know it, Mark Rosewater in his secret heart of hearts knows it, Richard Garfield knew it by 1996. Magic clings to it out of inertia. Knockoffs cling to it because the nerd market is nothing if not a sucker for awful 90s anachronisms. The most successful knockoffs left it behind long ago. Even this particular iteration--turning any card in your hand into a "land"--was already explored by Duel Masters/Kaijudo by 2004. Although in this iteration, the worker mechanic acts as a trashing outlet, which dovetails nicely into all the benefits of deckbuilding. B) Removes the curve problem. In a traditional CCG/LCG, your early game cards and your late game cards are all in the same deck from the start, and you just gotta hope against hope that you draw them in the right order. And entirely too often, you'll lose a game because you drew all your late game cards in the first three turns, or a fistful of two-drops in those crucial late turns. This doesn't happen in Codex. You always start your first two hands with all your earliest drops, then you phase them out into your worker pool as tech in your mid game cards, which you can in turn phase out as your finishers roll in. C) Hands don't play themselves. In Magic, about two-thirds of your turns are obvious plays. Either because there's an obvious drop for your current position on the mana curve, or because you're only drawing one card a turn, and your topdeck either is or isn't relevant to the current board state. Now, Codex gives you a fresh hand every turn, like Dominion, and jumps you up to a more interesting point on the gold curve. But Dominion has an obvious-play problem of its own; unless you've had a terminal collision, you usually just play all the cards in your hand. Okay, okay, in the mid-game of an engine battle, you often have to make a call about whether or not you risk triggering a mid-turn reshuffle. But let's be real, the real decisions of Dominion are about what you gain, not about how you use it. Codex solves this by pegging your draw to your discard. If you play more than two cards (usually one worker, one actual card) in a single turn, you're reducing your hand size and kneecapping your draw velocity, unless you can find a way to make up the difference. So you're having to make choices between what to drop and what to pitch. This is supplemented with several non-hand-based items you can spend your cash on, i.e. your heroes and your buildings. D) Decks are forced to have diversity of strategy. Like Fenn said, most constructed Magic decks are designed to do exactly one thing really well, and either work or don't, leading to boring/binary matchups. I think this is why a lot of Magic players prefer Limited play. The restrictions on your toolset mean you have to build something that can handle more varied situations. The restrictions of the Codex Spec system do something similar. Sirlin actually delves into this in one of his podcasts, if you can stand to listen to him talk. E) Timing is less of an annoying clusterfuck. Okay, I've heard pushback on this, but I'm pretty firm in my beliefs: Instant speed effects are a huge drag on Magic. On one hand, the Stack is one of the hardest things to wrap your head around in all of Magic. Yes, yes, last in first out, soooo simple I played the drat game for eight years. It's still a huge hangup for new players, and also where the most convoluted and memory-taxing parts of the game stem from. But more than that, the availability of instant effects just slows Magic down. If one side or the other is playing control, you have to wait. for. every. single. decision. to. be. approved. by. your. opponent. Oh my god gently caress that noise. (Also, I feel like a lot of critics of games really discount the virtues of downtime in games. It's something I actively demand of my harder games. I need to be able to let my brain reset to neutral for a few minutes after a long hard think. And it's nice being able to fetch a soda or use the bathroom without halting the game in progress.) F) I personally hate deck/list construction. Okay, this is just me. Back when I was in high school and/or my early college years, I loving loved writing decklists or army compositions in the margins of my notes while not paying attention to lectures. But these days I can't loving stand it. To me, building a Magic deck is the actual "game" part of Magic. It's where you make your really crucial, complex decisions. Sitting down with your opponent is often a protracted resolution phase. And I don't want that. At all. I'm a busy gal! ...okay, that's a loving lie, I'm an unemployed shut-in housewife these days. But I've got laundry to do and anime to binge. I want my game time to be spent with my opponents, not frittering over a pile of cards in a dark room. And I like that Codex construction is literally make-four-choices fast.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
Yeah okay, I'm sold. Thanks for the help!
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
Did anyone ever get a proper play by post setup for Codex? I know people were talking about it a few months back but I dunno if anything materialized.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
However, Codex isn't all sunshine and roses. There are some things it does appreciably worse than Magic or other CCGs/LCGs/whatever. X) There is no draft format. Drafting is near and dear to a lot of Magic players. And a lot of other CCGs/LCGs have tried to implement draft formats with varying success. Codex doesn't, and cannot, have a draft format. Except in the sense of, like, a pick/ban draft for Specs or something, a la League of Legends. But nothing like a Magic draft. Y) The art and flavor are terrible. Sirlin is not an art connoisseur, nor is he a writer of any skill, nor is he a worldbuilder. WotC isn't the greatest force of creative majesty in the industry, certainly; you can make a drinking game of the repetitive Nounadjective Nounverber card names in any given set, if you wanna flirt alcohol poisoning. But they're trying. Sirlin does not have a Ravnica or an Innistrad or a Kaladesh in him. And when he tries...ugh. ugh ugh ugh i need a shower. Z) Sirlin is a terrible person and I hate every stupid word that comes out of his stupid prick face. Which is something we all have to make peace with, in our own individual ways.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
On the flip side, issues with Codex: A) Requires extensive knowledge of both player's decks to be truly strategic This is kind of a thing with all of Sirlin's games, but he considers it a feature, not a bug. B) Fiddly as gently caress Counters and boards and binders of cards C) AP as gently caress When you have a binder full of poo poo you can choose from every round, it can melt people's brains D) Sirlin rules By this, I mean he makes a set of standard rules, then proceeds to create a bunch of cards that do special one off things that then require their own rules section and a FAQ detailing how unique snowflake rule #1 interacts with this other totally-not-MTG-ability that's not explicitly explained on the cards. EDIT: loving  look at this FAQ:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WyO1v5RCqBQwKYi4tfKOqOjRfTn2h9PDzvUMgSF4S2Y/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=0 FWIW, I love Puzzle Strike, and I mostly dig Yomi. Crackbone fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Feb 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
I actually hung out on his forums back when Yomi 2nd ed was in development (my ability idea even made it on a card  ) so none of those come as a surprise. As long as I don't have to go back there I'm cool with giving him money. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Gutter Owl posted:X) There is no draft format. I'd argue MTG draft is a result of the lovely distribution model. Yeah people enjoy it but it's an outgrowth from the rarity pack setup and an entryway for people since playing constructed is stupid expensive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:I'd argue MTG draft is a result of the lovely distribution model. I don't think Magic would be 10% as popular without the gambling. There is an entire meta-game of trading that lots of people enjoy even more than the game itself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
It's somehow amazing that the actual sit-down-and-play-cards part of Magic might be the least important bit of this massive success story.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:I'd argue MTG draft is a result of the lovely distribution model. Yeah people enjoy it but it's an outgrowth from the rarity pack setup and an entryway for people since playing constructed is stupid expensive. Yeah, but look how many board games have explicitly been built out trying to recreate the fun of Magic drafting without dropping 15 bucks a go. And hell, Cube Draft is still one of the most enduringly popular formats for the game, even among Magic expats. Magic draft was an accidental discovery, but a compelling one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 23:12
|
|
|
I finally got to play some Gloomhaven and it was good albeit with some complaints The rulebook sucks. I had given it a cursory read through the night before and watched a video online, but then when I actually tried to set up a game and play, it fell completely flat. There's no definitive outline/list of steps of what to do and how to get started. And then there's no definitive list of steps for a full turn. The concepts are explained but the order is vague and scattered. And there's so much to learn right off the bat since the rules are fairly front loaded. We did manage to muddle through it all, screwing up several things along the way. Probably need one more practice game before officially starting the campaign. I really think the game could have benefited from a tutorial scenario like what Mage Knight does. AI rules were probably our biggest stumbling block. I feel like these need to be tightened up a bit. There were several times where it was ambiguous what the monsters should do exactly which was irksome. I would prefer it greatly if I don't have to make any decisions, no matter how small, for them, and they operated solely by a clear definitive algorithm. In the end, the good parts outweighed the bad. The meat of the game is the combat and it seemed to gel quite well (after all the rules got sorted out). Lots of decisions and options! It was very tactical and often challenging. I look forward to the "deck building" aspect of the game that comes with the official campaign mode. I hope there will be interesting decisions there as well and not just higher level cards are automatically better. We played 2-player. but I would suspect that at higher player counts the game will get harder just from the increased chaos. Limited communication between 2-players was not too difficult to work around. I'll attack that guy, you go after that one. But in 4-player games, I would think they will step on each others toes a few times. And with the increased number of monsters, it would be even more dangerous if they wind up up targeting 1 player for that round due to player positioning.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
Still want to play Ashes draft at some point... 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Gutter Owl posted:And hell, Cube Draft is still one of the most enduringly popular formats for the game, even among Magic expats. This is where I have relegated to Magic in my life. I used to be right into it of course, but its very easy for MtG to become an all consuming hobby. But there is more to life you know? So I sold all of my decks and singles and binders of rares. Now I just have one 500 card drafting cube, one option on a self of many. Most of the cards are proxies Magic is great if you put it in its place and treat it as a LCG. Be careful you do not touch the poop though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:On the flip side, issues with Codex: After playing two games of this at BBGCON, its these two things that really are deal breakers. I see how he wanted to make something better then MTG but it just falls flat if I'm waiting 5-10 mins for a play or if we have to look up an ability.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:On the flip side, issues with Codex: don't forget the biggest one: art is as gently caress cheeseball plagiarized poo poo graphic design and design cohesion is poo poo too
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
The best way to play Sirlin games is to know the real name of whatever ip asset he's ripping off an exclusively refer to your units as that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
I am just gonna wait for V2.0 of any game Sirloin makes. No need to pay for a beta.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 01:02
|
|
|
djfooboo posted:I am just gonna wait for V2.0 of any game Sirloin makes. No need to pay for a beta. Pssssh, v2.0 is just the second beta. Gotta wait for 4.0 for that good poo poo
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
Siivola posted:I actually hung out on his forums back when Yomi 2nd ed was in development (my ability idea even made it on a card What ability was that? Personally, I enjoy Yomi, but it's a game you absolutely need to be familiar with fighting games for. It leans really hard on those mental shortcuts for understanding different characters capabilities. It's one thing to know that Vendetta can get back his King, it's another to understand that he's doing Vega's walljump crossups and what that implies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Let's talk Food Chain Magnate for a bit. I've played close to 10 games, and my dedicated group has played about 6 games with player counts varying from 3-5. We really like the game, but are starting to feel that the pool of viable strategies are more limited than first appears. This could definitely be group think though. I know some people here have played 20+ games, so I'd like to hear what you guys think about the following issues we have been having. 1. Ignoring Marketing + Producing Wide + Discounting Heavily seems like the most powerful option in the game. Almost all of our games seem to come down to who can execute the above strategy. It doesn't matter if players start with the Recruiting Milestone or the Training Milestone, in that both seem viable, and in the end it comes down to the above. Essentially by ignoring marketing (except for once or twice early game, in order to grab some of the +5 dollar bonuses), you can focus on building up your production & discount roles. That way you can produce any good in the game, and sell it for cheaper than anyone else. It's not uncommon in our games that 2 people are selling for a unit price of 1-3, and no one else can even get a single sale. The logical answer to this should be to either 1. create enough demand to exceed the stock of those 2 players, and then sell for a higher price than them or 2. try to form a smaller empire away from those 2 players. Neither of these strategies seem to work though. For number 1, it seems relatively impossible to actually demand flood the board in an efficient way. It's not very difficult to meet a very high level of demand-- 1 chef, 2 cooks of the opposite type, and a truck or zeppelin will you fill a tremendous amount of demand. It's easy to get that combo + more if you are actively ignoring ever taking a marketing role. The bigger issue is that by demand flooding the market, you are essentially allowing the heavy discounters to sell everything before you get a shot at the leftovers, which means they are still making a ton of sales. This is also an easy strategy for them to counter, because they can just start slapping gardens on the houses they know they can fill, and end up making just as much as you, even though they are selling for a much cheaper price. For number 2, this just doesn't seem possible period. Even of on the largest board in the game (5x4), it is almost impossible to escape someone who is selling for a unit price of 1-3. They will likely beat you to even the corners of the board. One obvious answer is that everyone should stay vigilant, and make sure that pricing roles are taken at an equal rate, but that seems like a pretty lame answer. It would basically just make it a requirement to take pricing roles in an organized fashion every single time we play. Our group has yet to find a good answer to this strategy, and thus most of our games end up getting dominated by 2 people, while the rest of the players struggle to make any sales at all. Also every single winner has been able to produce all goods. We've yet to see a game where someone who focuses on 1-2 goods only wins or even does well. 2. Is the Luxuries Manager a useless card? Given how powerful pricing down is, pricing up just seems like a terribly bad idea. Adding 10 to your unit price on a 5x4 board, means anyone else will instantly beat you if they can match your production. Unless you are playing against spectacularly bad players, how can you make this work for anything more than 1 turn, if that? Since marketing has a 1 turn delay before it affects the board, people can easily prepare for your luxury manager play. In addition once you reach mid-game, people who are doing well almost certainly can produce every combination of good. 3. Is 5 players an actual viable player count? I've played more games than just the 6 with my group, and every time I play a 5 player game, it's almost guaranteed that at least 2 of the players will be so far behind they stand no chance at all. Since it's a long game, it becomes pretty painful for those 2-3 players. Have any of you folks who have 20+ plays logged seen games where all 5 players are equally competitive to the end? Megasabin fucked around with this message at 03:30 on Feb 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Megasabin posted:2. Is the Luxuries Manager a useless card? I've found that the secret to successful use of the Luxuries Manager is to create an insane amount of demand with creating lots of houses and grabbing the first radio campaign and maybe a few more campaigns so that the other players don't have a chance of fulfilling all of the demands, and then you fulfill whats left and get insane profit for it. To be fair I only tried this in a 3 player game where one player was inexperienced compared to me and the second player, I haven't tried that strategy in a 4 player game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
Megasabin posted:Let's talk Food Chain Magnate for a bit. I've played close to 10 games,
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
I'm only at 5-6 games played, but isn't there two possible counters to broad based production with a price war A) Pure Waitress action, rushing the first to $100 milestone, then ignore or leech off the discounting war while you crank out $7.5 a waitress. Open with recruiting girl -> RG + Waitress. B) focus laser like on one means product? E.g. marketing milestones and flood board with heavily discounted demand for just that type of good? E.g. Turn 1: Trainer Turn 2: Management Trainee -> JVP Turn 3: JVP -> VP + RG Turn 4: VP-> Guru, Discount Manager + Management Trainee Turn 5: Marketing Trainee -> Brand Director, Producer -> Upskilled Producer for whatever good type you think you can get the +5$ milestone Turn 6: Turn won't be super efficient unless you can sell some goods, but drop a radio and start cranking the handle, discount cost as far as possible. It does seem like the Guru opening is vulnerable to price wars, so maybe the best target is the marketing milestones. Cthulhu Dreams fucked around with this message at 03:58 on Feb 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
Personally, I would add conscious calculating of combat math as being another un-fun thing of Magic and most other turn-cards-sideways games (in low powered formats, at least). Some similar games end up with even more complicated but calculable board states. Part of the reason I like Netrunner and now Destiny is they don't lend themselves as much to the same kind of hard analysis because of hidden information and dice, respectively. More eV than consciously calculating, at least at the level I play at.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
How do you sell anything in FCM without marketing???? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
Gutter Owl posted:Yeah, but look how many board games have explicitly been built out trying to recreate the fun of Magic drafting without dropping 15 bucks a go. And hell, Cube Draft is still one of the most enduringly popular formats for the game, even among Magic expats. Have there really been that many board games that try to replicate mtg drafting? In my mind I can see a largely simplified mtg skeleton with 100 card sets tuned for draft. I can't think of any but seems like a cool idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
Megasabin posted:2. Is the Luxuries Manager a useless card? New business developer + luxuries manager means you can get rich feeding a couple improved houses on an isolated street no one else can reach. Let everyone else squabble over $5 burgers, you're making $25 a pop.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 04:05
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:Perhaps the overproducing players simply have too much time to put their empires together. Maybe opening trainer to Guru to radio would enable a quicker start? Cthulhu Dreams posted:I'm only at 5-6 games played, but isn't there two possible counters to broad based production with a price war So the thing is that the Triple Hire Milestone version of the Mass Produce + Discount + Ignore Marketing is a rather fast running empire. In the early game you have a ton of hires, so you can grab Food Producer + manager trainee + whatever else you need every single turn. It doesn't take a lot of training to get a discount manager, and by having 1 discount manager + 1-2 pricing managers, you can probably beat out the person dropping the radio tower at turn 6. Getting 3 hires a turn for the first several turns + 2 free manager trainee's means you don't really have to worry about being limited by slots. I think 1 viable way to beat it would be if someone went for the long game, and trained several marketers to radio tower/airplane, but had the discipline to wait and unleash a flood of demand all at the same time. That way people couldn't adapt to the slow trickle of 1 new marketing campaign per turn. Lorini posted:How do you sell anything in FCM without marketing???? The idea is that you let other people do the marketing so you don't have to waste hires and trains on it. Then you just move in on their market with your discounted goods.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
But if that's the optimal strategy then you sit there for hours right??
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 04:11
|
|
|
Lorini posted:But if that's the optimal strategy then you sit there for hours right?? You are right-- it does rely on other people marketing. In every game so far 1-2 people have felt that they wanted to try to market relatively early, and the people who went for discount + broad producing just stole their markets for them. I guess as our group's meta evolves, maybe people will purposefully choke off marketing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 04:20
|
|
|
Megasabin posted:So the thing is that the Triple Hire Milestone version of the Mass Produce + Discount + Ignore Marketing is a rather fast running empire. If it's literally 2 guys holding off until someone markets, Wouldn't waitressing beat it? Without the marketing milestones or even any demand on the board you're not making big dollar off good sales and the waitresses engine goes regardless. It will hit the CFO milestone by turn 7. The other thing I'm puzzled by is if you have the first to market milestones you can discount to zero or below - how do the guys with no marketing keep up? I just won a 1v1 game selling burgers for a dollar.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:27 |
|
|
Cthulhu Dreams posted:If it's literally 2 guys holding off until someone markets, Wouldn't waitressing beat it? Without the marketing milestones or even any demand on the board you're not making big dollar off good sales and the waitresses engine goes regardless. It will hit the CFO milestone by turn 7. Well they don't totally ignore marketing. Megasabin posted:
So essentially they grab one marketer early game, and play it early game to start the demand chain and get the bonus. From then on, they ignore marketing. In addition those initial billboards they placed are infinite, so they will always have some demand to fill.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 04:24
|
|