|
Tales of Woe posted:I like the Argent win condition a lot conceptually but I think it probably fits better in a lighter game where you're not quite as invested. I haven't played the game but it seems like playing a 2 hour brainburner and then having the scoring be 'noisy' rather than fully deterministic is not ideal. Well the thing is, it's only a noisy win condition if you allow it to be. There's plenty of ways to acquire marks in the game and remove most of the uncertainty from final scoring. In my experience, that is actually the dominant strategy. Players who ignore marks and try to accumulate a bunch of everything tend to lose voters by margins of 0 or 1.
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 10:24 |
|
|
Ojetor posted:Well the thing is, it's only a noisy win condition if you allow it to be. There's plenty of ways to acquire marks in the game and remove most of the uncertainty from final scoring. In my experience, that is actually the dominant strategy. Players who ignore marks and try to accumulate a bunch of everything tend to lose voters by margins of 0 or 1. Also, as I understand it, the 2.0 version include an updated ruleset that include some of the currently semi-official stuff about how you can only score dudes you have marks on and that the number of marks you have on them breaks ties or something to force people into marking stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Also, as I understand it, the 2.0 version include an updated ruleset that include some of the currently semi-official stuff about how you can only score dudes you have marks on and that the number of marks you have on them breaks ties or something to force people into marking stuff. I think it's just that if you tie with someone and you marked and they didn't then you win the tie before it goes to influence. You can still outright win ones you haven't marked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Ojetor posted:Well the thing is, it's only a noisy win condition if you allow it to be. There's plenty of ways to acquire marks in the game and remove most of the uncertainty from final scoring. In my experience, that is actually the dominant strategy. Players who ignore marks and try to accumulate a bunch of everything tend to lose voters by margins of 0 or 1. My experience with the game probably isn't as large as yours, but the fact that you need to spend resources to see the victory conditions doesn't seem to agree with your point. I can specialize to make sure I accomplish the goals of my marks, which all but guarantees that I lose everything that I didn't mark and even some of the ones that I did mark depending on how the cards come out. If I just acquire everything, I will probably lose some voters that others have worked hard for, but I will likely win the 'random voters' that no one checked, along with by chance winning some of the voters other people have checked. Again, marking is a resource, so every worker that you use to mark is an advantage that I have in acquiring more stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
I haven't yet played a game where by game end there are any voters no one has checked. I've only really played with 4-5 players, so maybe that's a factor. At lower player counts just accumulating stuff might be more viable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
al-azad posted:Time of Struggles Is this a new game or did you mean Time of Crisis? I had to stop myself from grabbing it and Pericles on the weekend, just hope they don't disappear for a long time and I curse myself for inaction. I wish there was some bigger Canadian stuff similar to Gencon/Origins. I don't know if we have anything close. The sales alone would be worth it from the sound of it, ignoring the various vendor booths and designers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
al-azad posted:I've never played Wits and Wagers but the new version was enjoyable for a trivia game. Won $20 from it and immediately reinvested it at CSI's booth for Tash Kalar and Time of Struggles, a new GMT wargame that touts being a deckbuilder except you choose your cards. It looks interesting. It's called Time of Crisis. That period of Roman history is commonly referred to as "The Crisis of the Third Century". I've only played through solo so far as a learning experience and I can't wait to get a real game going. Despite being a GMT game, it's no more complex than Kemet and it has a similar emphasis on immediate player interaction, whether through military attack or political takeover.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Time of Crisis is really good. It provides the control you want in a political wargame with the typical deckbuilding choices of trashing and acquiring new cards. Also, GMT games can vary wildly in difficulty so it's sad that people will think it's only for grognard games, when they also make party games (thunder alley). The real sad part about Time of Crisis is that people won't like the theme even though it's a great choice. If it was about zombies and the players as survivors barracading the walls, with a few minis thrown in for players/leaders, CMON would sell a million copies. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
I had Twilight Struggle on the brain. Mainly I got it because I had $40 burning a hole in my pocket but also because A Few Acres of Snow was a frustrating disappointment and I don't see myself getting Hands in the Sea. My friend and I both despise deckbuilders so this is a last straw salvation before condemning an entire genre. I wouldn't worry about Pericles selling out. CSI had like 50 unsold copies and even at tiny wargame booths at Origins they had stacks upon stacks. What that says about the game I couldn't say having not played it but it doesn't seem to be doing well or GMT over produced it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
Pericles was hyped as a spiritual successor to Churchill, which was very successful by GMT standards. However, from my reading of the rules, it seems way more complicated. And ancient history games will never be as popular as WW2 ones. So it should remain available for awhile.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Triumph and tragedy 2nd printing probably had a lot to do with that if Pericles was hyped as a Churchill successor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
al-azad posted:I had Twilight Struggle on the brain. Mainly I got it because I had $40 burning a hole in my pocket but also because A Few Acres of Snow was a frustrating disappointment and I don't see myself getting Hands in the Sea. My friend and I both despise deckbuilders so this is a last straw salvation before condemning an entire genre. Twilight Struggle isn't a deckbuilder.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
taser rates posted:Twilight Struggle isn't a deckbuilder. I didn't say it was. I typed Time of Struggles instead of Twilight of Crisis because I literally always have Twilight Struggle on the brain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
taser rates posted:Twilight Struggle isn't a deckbuilder. Well.... You're dealing with a known card set... your hand gets refreshed every turn... multiple reshuffles happen per game... Cards added as you go... A big part of the strategy is trashing cards... 
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:Well.... To be fair, you aren't adding cards through game actions, merely time. And you share the deck with your opponent. ... and all that does is say it's a deckbuilding variant. Now I want to play TS again. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:Well.... This is probably why I like TS over a lot of other CDGs that lack the deck cycling/trashing aspects
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
Just bought the reprint of Winner's Circle on a whim. I don't know if I'll get my money's worth out of it in playtime, but drat if it isn't the nicest set of components I've seen lately. The horses are all prepainted well, metal coins, and all the stuff needed to play Royal Turf variant.
Crackbone fucked around with this message at 02:35 on Aug 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 00:32
|
|
|
CaptainRightful posted:Pericles was hyped as a spiritual successor to Churchill, which was very successful by GMT standards. However, from my reading of the rules, it seems way more complicated. And ancient history games will never be as popular as WW2 ones. So it should remain available for awhile. Pericles seems quite complicated and plays best with exactly four people so I can see why it isn't selling too briskly. It's actually remarkably simple once you figure out the relationship between the phases (debate what to do, find out who is in charge politically for the turn, take turns placing the debated issues on the map, take turns resolving the issues, check for victory). Coming up with a coherent strategy or having any idea what your opponents (which include the other party in your league) are going to do is definitely complicated. And having a reasonable sense of your goals and strategy requires that you know the cards and possibly Greek history but preferably both.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 01:36
|
|
|
So there is a new solo scenario for The Colonists in the most recent Lookout-Games magazine. I should be getting it today or tomorrow. No idea what it will be about but I'm excited. If anyone is interested I can translate it and try to scan any maps or setup intructions that may come with it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 10:01
|
|
|
Selecta84 posted:So there is a new solo scenario for The Colonists in the most recent Lookout-Games magazine. Yup I'm interested!
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 12:46
|
|
|
Ojetor posted:Well the thing is, it's only a noisy win condition if you allow it to be. There's plenty of ways to acquire marks in the game and remove most of the uncertainty from final scoring. In my experience, that is actually the dominant strategy. Players who ignore marks and try to accumulate a bunch of everything tend to lose voters by margins of 0 or 1. I played one game and ran a 2nd one at gen con and in both of them every voter was marked by at least 2 people (and this was with the first game ending at round 4 and 2nd one ending at Round 3 due to player time constraints), and yeah marks are not terribly uncommon supporter cards, and there's also rooms that give marks out. I can see what they're saying about it being 'noisy' but it's a noise you can cut through if you really want to. I believe the official 2e rule change is that voters in the case of ties first go to whoever has it marked, and if tied there, then to most influence, so 2e raises the importance of marks and reduces the impact of influence which is a fairly solid change, since influence just flat out had too much importance with the merit badge and tiebreaker thing. I was glad to show the game off though so thanks for playing whoever some of ya'll are (i am bad with names) I did not buy any games at gen con this year, as nothing i wanted was available and nothing i wanted was 'new'. I did stop and peer at the Pandemic S2 setup they had, but i always doubt 'spoiler free' and didn't try it. Cephalophair had both Gloomhaven and Founders of gloomhaven setup in their tiny rear end booth i wanted to try out, but their demos were long. Sloober fucked around with this message at 13:39 on Aug 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 13:36
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Also, as I understand it, the 2.0 version include an updated ruleset that include some of the currently semi-official stuff about how you can only score dudes you have marks on and that the number of marks you have on them breaks ties or something to force people into marking stuff. I really don't like that change. Making a read of a scoring category based on your opponents without needing to look at the mark was one of the most interesting bits about the scoring system. EDIT: If it's just that marks break ties, that seems better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 13:57
|
|
|
So is Vital Lacerda the new Vlaada when it comes to heavy euros? There's a lot of interconnected parts in all of his games and I"m reading about them after getting The Gallerist. I will probably end up also getting Lisboa because the art direction and theme are wonderful. Undead Hippo posted:I really don't like that change. Making a read of a scoring category based on your opponents without needing to look at the mark was one of the most interesting bits about the scoring system.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:So is Vital Lacerda the new Vlaada when it comes to heavy euros? No, Chvatil is the guy who wishes he was Vital Lacerda. Lacerda knows when to stop designing, mostly, and can kill his darlings if he makes a mistake (see: Vinhos 2016). Chvatil can't do either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
ima let u finish in me posted:
Friedemann Friese always has interesting ideas and a fragile gamestate that missing one fiddly rule can bust. I'm actually a fan, but I wish he would get someone else to write his rules.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Is New Angeles good? I keep hearing mixed opinions on it. I really like New Angeles : it's all about negotiations and mean backstabbing. All things I like in boardgames!  Obviously you need the right group of people to enjoy it fully: if you're gaming group is composed of shy zombies, leave the game on the shelves man. Game of the Year 2016 for me! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
Jedit posted:No, Chvatil is the guy who wishes he was Vital Lacerda. Lacerda knows when to stop designing, mostly, and can kill his darlings if he makes a mistake (see: Vinhos 2016). Chvatil can't do either. War is declared.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
Jedit posted:No, Chvatil is the guy who wishes he was Vital Lacerda. Lacerda knows when to stop designing, mostly, and can kill his darlings if he makes a mistake (see: Vinhos 2016). Chvatil can't do either. Vinhos Deluxe is that much of an upgrade?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 15:58
|
|
|
The fuss over the fairs in vinhos is really overblown. The ridiculous amount of dumb arithmetic used to pay for buildings in Lisboa, on the other hand, is very bad.
Impermanent fucked around with this message at 16:32 on Aug 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
edit: Never mind, wrong thread. I am an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
ketchup vs catsup posted:Vinhos Deluxe is that much of an upgrade? Nope, it's more or less Agricola/caverna and certain people will prefer a certain rule set
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 16:42
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Is New Angeles good? I keep hearing mixed opinions on it. There are a lot of things I like about it, but I have to recommend strongly against it. It's WAY too long for what it is, often pushing 3 hours simply because the semi-coop nature generates a lot of discussion and negotiation. All this talk is the best part of the game, but there's just not enough meat to keep it interesting. The game is also very highly random, most of this is driven by the asset cards varying wildly in power, but also because how the game is structured means that your ability to affect the board will vary significantly from turn to turn. If the city doesn't have any problems you can solve, or if you just don't have any cards left from previous turns, you have very little agency. On the flip side, if you're the only one that can solve a major problem and that happens to drop a very powerful asset into your lap (especially the ones that give you a bunch more cards) that means you have significantly more agency than everyone else for the rest of the game. I love the art and genuinely enjoyed the first couple games, but its just not good enough to warrant more plays. I'm really hoping for an expansion that turns my opinion around, but they haven't announced anything yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:War is declared. jedits opinions on vlaada are basically rutibex caliber game suggestions tbf Vlaada's last heavy game was back in 2013 with Task-Kalar anyway, at this point it's light party games which have been pretty good up to but probably not including his latest That's a Question (I don't know if you can really say Duet is his)
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
Sloober posted:jedits opinions on vlaada are basically rutibex caliber game suggestions tbf Yeah I wouldn't say Duet is his, even though it's the best party game with his name on it. That's a Question is fine, better than other games in the genre like Apples to Apples or Cards Against Humanity but that's saying nothing at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Is New Angeles good? I keep hearing mixed opinions on it. I played it once, and didn't really feel it. The game just felt very repetitive in that there was a checklist of things that needed to be done (i.e., androids needed moving, blackouts needed lifting, anarchists needed disappearing, etc) without much reason to vie for a winning position since none of the assets really seemed worth giving up other resources for them, especially since the alternative option was also likely to be pretty reasonable in the grand scheme of things. That is to say, there didn't actually seem to be any real benefit to negotiating aside from the marginal benefit of the asset card. Unlike even something like, say, Battlestar Galactica, the game never felt like it advanced or changed throughout except for the board state getting steadily worse as a result of Bad Things™ and limited actions, which didn't really change the overall strategy of plugging holes. By the time the second set of crises came about, I was getting bored doing the same thing ad infinitum, by the third I had checked out of the game entirely. I wasn't the "traitor," but I was also not sure what actions they could take that wouldn't have made it very obvious what they were trying to do. I do understand that games like this are pretty group dependent, and part of that dependence is also familiarity with the game and its mechanics. But that being said, I would rather play Archipelago ten times out of ten.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Last post regarding the Iron Clays:kinkouin posted:It's been a few pages, just reminding goons if they want to get in on Iron Clay chips: I've sent out PM's to those that have stated interest and updated my spreadsheets for their orders. If anyone else still is interested, PM me. Otherwise this is the last time I post on the Iron Clays and Brass. Otherwise: kinkouin posted:Would anyone else be interested in piggybacking on some KS pledges I'm on when pledge managers open? Thanks for putting up with the spammy posts 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Are people in this thread still high on Voyages of Marco Polo? Looks like it's about to be available again, and it's in my 'fast-playing middleweight euro" wheelhouse so I'm wondering how essential it is. My main concern is that it looks like it could be a game where your strategy is heavily dictated by your player power without room for opportunism or tactical revision, due to how few turns you have. How does this play out in practice?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Some characters have more flexibility in their strategy than others, but even the most rigid ones can change direction when they need to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
Tales of Woe posted:Are people in this thread still high on Voyages of Marco Polo? Looks like it's about to be available again, and it's in my 'fast-playing middleweight euro" wheelhouse so I'm wondering how essential it is. My main concern is that it looks like it could be a game where your strategy is heavily dictated by your player power without room for opportunism or tactical revision, due to how few turns you have. How does this play out in practice? I have yet to get the game yet, but at least the advanced rules do not randomly assign player characters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 10:24 |
|
|
Impermanent posted:Some characters have more flexibility in their strategy than others, but even the most rigid ones can change direction when they need to. OK that's what I wanted to hear, thanks. There's also an expansion on the way apparently that adds stuff for a 5th player and a bigger board and more characters and such.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 20:26
|
|