|
cenotaph posted:If I recall correctly, he praised the parts that would be good if they were implemented well without realizing that they're poorly done. Namely the asymmetry. He failed to engage with any of the problems, especially in regard to politics being mostly leader bashing and simplistic trades and that the card distribution is awful and it's fundamentally un-fun to play a bad hand. Then he finished with "SO BEFORE YOU CRITICIZE COSMIC ENCOUNTER. " It was pretty embarrassing and I stopped watching his videos after that because it made me seriously question his capabilities as...whatever he's portraying himself as. It's called All The Games You Like Are Bad, which technically says nothing about the quality of the games he likes.
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 16:59 |
|
|
CaptainRightful posted:It's called All The Games You Like Are Bad, which technically says nothing about the quality of the games he likes. I never thought of it that way 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
His tastes are often polar opposites to mine, but he is one of the few people on YouTube who is actually articulate and critical when it comes to talking about games.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 04:05
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Has anyone found or made a one-document 7 Wonders Reference? Between the three expansion boxes and Anniversary packs and whatnot, its gotten to the point that even with my regular gaming group we have to reveal hand contents at the start of the game so everyone can go "okay, so, what does this symbol do??" over and over. https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/112954/7-wonders-full-player-aid-including-leaders-cities i think this covers all of it. the leaders has always been the sticking points for my group, but i have not played 7w in quite some time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
OgreNoah posted:We finished Pandemic Legacy S1 Friday, won on the second try in December. Had a final point total of 767 . I think I'm just mostly disappointed that you didn't name your diseases
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 15:18
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:I think I'm just mostly disappointed that you didn't name your diseases Yeah, shameful
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
I remember accidentally losing a game in S1 because we prioritized naming a disease over actually winning a game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
Huxley posted:I remember accidentally losing a game in S1 because we prioritized naming a disease over actually winning a game. Let me tell you about S2 where I prioritize exploring new options over winning the current game and it is starting to infuriate the other players. It works both ways though. We had a game just last night we *knew* we were going to lose but we tried to win anyway against my protests, so we spun our wheels and lost a game with little meta-progress to show for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
SettingSun posted:Let me tell you about S2 where I prioritize exploring new options over winning the current game and it is starting to infuriate the other players. It works both ways though. We had a game just last night we *knew* we were going to lose but we tried to win anyway against my protests, so we spun our wheels and lost a game with little meta-progress to show for it. Those are actually my favorite games in both seasons: the "gamieness" of realizing you have zero chance of winning and swapping into future-building mode.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
Sloober posted:https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/112954/7-wonders-full-player-aid-including-leaders-cities That doesn't have Babel or the new Anniversary packs, sadly
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Huxley posted:Those are actually my favorite games in both seasons: the "gamieness" of realizing you have zero chance of winning and swapping into future-building mode. I feel like s2 actually punishes you for trying to win or rather it rewards you more for playing proactively which isn't how base pandemic works.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
al-azad posted:I feel like s2 actually punishes you for trying to win or rather it rewards you more for playing proactively which isn't how base pandemic works. Season 2 really does feel more like a SimCity game than a Pandemic game. Pandemic and S1 are very much about putting out fires, where S2 is more about building fire department infrastructure. For example (June/Box 1/Box 6 spoilers): We caught a cube on Mexico City the game after we connected it to the grid. Knowing it was going to drop to zero pop (from its base 1) at the end of the game we made a concerted effort to get down there and put its infection card into Box 6. We postponed winning the game a couple of turns because it was the only game that infection card was going to be in the actual discard without bumping the population back up then having to spend 2 cubes on it every game until we could get back down to it. So we walked someone down there just to put its card into Box 6, bumped its population up to 1 in the end-game step, and now we can count it as on the grid the rest of the game without ever having to waste another cube on it in the setup, or even walking down there from Denver. That's a line of thinking the game wants you to make that is very different from anything I remember in S1.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
Did anyone play Spyfall as PnP? it seems cool but im not sure how my group will like it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
I played Boss Monster last night despite hating the game and I still hate it but it wasn't an unpleasant experience and it was over quickly. That's my story.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
Boss Monster was the first board game I ever bought and thought it might be cool and good, but it was actually not and once I played other board games it became obvious how bad it was. I still have all of it in my collection though, because it has some sentimental value.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
I played Azul last night with the wife. First impressions are extremely positive. I led most of the game with a 5-10pt lead but wasn't paying attention and missed that she had completed all of one color set and she absolutely crushed me in final scoring. Not a lot of complaints but I could imagine it would be crippling for anyone with a tendency toward AP.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:Boss Monster was the first board game I ever bought and thought it might be cool and good, but it was actually not and once I played other board games it became obvious how bad it was. I still have all of it in my collection though, because it has some sentimental value. My first designer board game was Reiner Knizia's Lord of the Rings. For that reason I love it dearly and will happily play it whenever anyone asks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
SettingSun posted:My first designer board game was Reiner Knizia's Lord of the Rings. For that reason I love it dearly and will happily play it whenever anyone asks. That was my first cooperative game and the Sauron pawn slowly bearing down on the Fellowship still haunts me. Love that game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
Huxley posted:That's a line of thinking the game wants you to make that is very different from anything I remember in S1. I really like the drama of Season 2 - you're really riding a roller coaster as the game rules and resources keep changing month to month. From a min-max'ing, high-scoring perspective it can be a bit frustrating, as you quite often are saying "well, if we would have known X, we would have done Y" and sometimes you're subject to some big swings of luck based on making decisions without knowing how they'll play out. But I like that your meta-game decisions are important and give a satisfying sense of agency, and I think (barring some very bad luck) the game's self-balancing will mostly be able to keep you in a reasonable difficulty window. Certainly for us we've stayed on the edge of disaster for most of the game. I really like the way they've handled the game story writing - super concise, but just enough to add a satisfying flavor to the in-game-rules narrative. We're doing our first shot at December tomorrow after a super tight November win, and we're all quite excited. Great game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Doug posted:I played Azul last night with the wife. First impressions are extremely positive. I led most of the game with a 5-10pt lead but wasn't paying attention and missed that she had completed all of one color set and she absolutely crushed me in final scoring. Not a lot of complaints but I could imagine it would be crippling for anyone with a tendency toward AP. I got Azul this weekend and my wife and I have managed to get 13 games in. While it’s mostly just dealing with maximizing tiles in the current round, there’s a fair bit of strategy in 2 player as you get into the later rounds, watching your opponent and trying to hit multiple verticals or the all of one color bonus. Since you can only having each color once in each column and row, the last round or two is usually foiled with some pretty great tension as you try to not get stuck with unnecessary tiles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
Has anybody played Corrupted Kingdoms? Its on sale on CSI right now for almost nothing. I love the theme, but I haven't seen any kind of talk about it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
No need to pnp Spyfall, just use this site. We use it in theme park lines a lot and it’s great. http://spyfall.adrianocola.com/
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
SKREEEEEEECH Reworld is a Kiesling-Kramer joint???? I have to wonder what the original theme was because I refuse to believe they were like "unt handen managementekraftwerk in harden syfyspiele"
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
AceRimmer posted:Is La Granja any good? It appears to have the rare Fedora Dice Man/Heavy Cardboard crossover seal of approval. I haven't played but I was thinking about asking the thread this same question recently, so I'm replying so someone else might see this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 03:03
|
|
|
My wife and I both really like La Granja. It's got pretty good variability from game to game, and has a nice escalation where in the starting rounds you aren't able to do much but by the end you have all kinds of combos and actions you can combine to pull off some crazy turns. There's also a little bit of interaction between the market and the race to complete orders in the town, and it scales pretty well, though the market is a little more interactive with more players. Some criticisms I've seen are that the different phases of each round feel disjointed and that there's too much going on but I don't really feel that, I think the different phases and mechanics work and play well off each other. We used to have Grand Austria Hotel which a lot of people were gushing over when it came out but IMO La Granja does everything that's good about GAH way better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
I played La Granja once and I found it just OKAY. If it were the only "designer boardgame" in existence I would play the poo poo out of it, but there are luckily thousands of good games out there. The way you can put cards into your player mat thing to upgrade your farm is kind of cool, but it's not that cool. There's a decent amount of engine building and cool stuff you can do, and the numbered hex thing in the middle creates interaction, but the game–to me–just felt like a really dry worker placement game where nothing is stand out amazing. I really kind of disliked the hexes in the middle. It felt super "gamey" with no clear analog to anything with the theme, like "here is the interaction component we have added on." I'm almost positive La Granja is way better game than Stone Age, but playing La Granja reminded me of Stone Age in that it's just a WORKER PLACEMENT game. There's a dice component where dice rolls are actually important–you still are drafting from what is rolled, but sometimes what you need to roll won't come up even if you have first pick of the dice. There's just lots of stuff in there that feels very "bla" to me and nothing that feels super inspiring. The only way I'd play it again without just feeling annoyed that I had to play it is if I met someone who was REALLY into the game and said something to me like, "Trust me man, after you play two or three more times it will really click with you just how great this game is." It feels like a game that MIGHT have that kind of potential in there, but I wouldn't want to have to play it over other games I'd rather play to try to discover that potential. If I wanted to play a solid game I know is good that is also kind of "boring feeling" I'd play Castles of Burgundy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 03:37
|
|
|
The aftermath of a four-player Twilight Imperium 4th. All of us playing for the first time, took about 8 hours including 2-ish hours actually setting up and teaching.  Basically everything people say about the game is correct. It is simultaneously the most unwieldy board game I've played but also very engaging. Dredging up warnings people gave me about the game a decade ago, I stressed multiple times upfront that it's not a war game and the only goal is to score points via any means possible. From the get go there was a lot of politicizing, trading, and player diplomacy going on. I felt a little frustrated playing the Nekro Virus during the first agenda phase because everyone made sub-optimal votes just to deny me technology. I then vowed to throw all my resources to harass them at everyone opportunity but I think that's actually the right way to play them. I had poo poo for planets and a tiny army but my tactical actions were maxed out and after stealing cruiser 2 technology I would send out kamikaze death patrols a scored some technology objectives to take the game. We had to call it at a tie but being my house (and the fact they left me with cleanup) I was declared the winner. Cleaning up this drat thing I still feel like I lost. e: One person described it as "less than I hoped for, better than I feared" which is where I'd put it. A game I would be down to play like once a quarter but would be happy to schedule months in advance. al-azad fucked around with this message at 07:06 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 07:03
|
|
|
al-azad posted:The aftermath of a four-player Twilight Imperium 4th. All of us playing for the first time, took about 8 hours including 2-ish hours actually setting up and teaching. I've seen a few trip reports of 4th now, and that seems to be the consensus. What's really REALLY offputting to me is that every single one talked about the Nekro Virus and not at all about any other faction.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 09:43
|
|
|
!Klams posted:I've seen a few trip reports of 4th now, and that seems to be the consensus. What's really REALLY offputting to me is that every single one talked about the Nekro Virus and not at all about any other faction. Nekro Virus is the most interesting one. Maybe the Ghosts too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 10:06
|
|
|
!Klams posted:I've seen a few trip reports of 4th now, and that seems to be the consensus. What's really REALLY offputting to me is that every single one talked about the Nekro Virus and not at all about any other faction. Like I said, first time players so our consensus was "pick the coolest looking races." The Nekro felt like I was playing Diplomacy. I had the crappiest part of the map, never really built anything, and everyone generally avoided contact with me. So I kind of fed the other players, helped them build up some strong tech, then stole it all with kamikaze attacks and well played action cards. The Nekro can't research or vote on agendas which actually makes controlling technology and imperial strategies important as it's your way of outclassing everyone in command. Another player was Xxcha who have this annoying ability where the diplomacy strategy lets them take adjacent planets. They came in last, largely because the player was getting too involved with playing Civilization and not focusing on scoring, but as we reached the end they built a strong enough engine that they could've won in a single turn if we hadn't rushed to finish. Another player was Ghosts who get their own home planet in another dimension or something and all warps are adjacent. They made good use of this by being the first to take Rex and were a strong military force. But if I wasn't drafting the military strategy I was drafting imperial so they didn't benefit much. Still, no one was safe from this dude and the objectives for taking X planets or X types were always threatened by the dude who can just pop up next to it. Last player was the L1z1x which seemed fairly unimpressive. They have super dreadnoughts, steal any space ports or PDS during an invasion, and bombard every combat turn. I tied with this guy and made sure to copy the super dreadnoughts ASAP. Nothing fancy but you don't want to go toe to toe with them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 11:02
|
|
|
Whenever I play TI I completely ignore points and do a military buildup and burn the home planet of whoever sleights me first. Stu: "But CommonShore, you have no points at the end of the game." CS: "Yes, Stu, but the surface of your home planet has been turned into uninhabitable glass. You should have thought twice before placing that Asteroid field during game setup." 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 14:35
|
|
|
I think TI3 had a rule that said that if you don't control your homeworld, you can't win. I forget if TI4 has the same rule. You can kingmake via assassination that way!
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 14:45
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:I think TI3 had a rule that said that if you don't control your homeworld, you can't win. I forget if TI4 has the same rule. You can kingmake via assassination that way! Most factions cannot score objectives if they don't control their homeworld. One can.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 15:10
|
|
|
al-azad posted:
Was this your first time playing TI period, or just fourth edition? If not I was going to ask if you noticed the differences between the third and fourth editions. Everything I've seen about the changes so far has made me pretty interested. EDIT: Has anyone got to try the new Civilization game yet? It seems really reasonably priced and I was hoping we might finally have a decent non 14 hour civ experience. FulsomFrank fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 15:39
|
|
|
al-azad posted:The aftermath of a four-player Twilight Imperium 4th. All of us playing for the first time, took about 8 hours including 2-ish hours actually setting up and teaching. I think it was you who had space empires 4x and suggested it to me a while back, but can use the counters for that pretty well with TI4? If it's more objectives-based like forbidden stars and I could cut out the minis crap and replace them with a superior fog of war version, I'd probably get it at some point. I was going to get it during my store's black friday sales but seeing how CSI/MM both oodles in stock, they'll probably have it on sale for $80 or so at some point anyway. I picked up Through the Desert instead 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:I think it was you who had space empires 4x and suggested it to me a while back, but can use the counters for that pretty well with TI4? If it's more objectives-based like forbidden stars and I could cut out the minis crap and replace them with a superior fog of war version, I'd probably get it at some point. I was going to get it during my store's black friday sales but seeing how CSI/MM both oodles in stock, they'll probably have it on sale for $80 or so at some point anyway. I picked up Through the Desert instead When Christmas rolls around and I get my bonus, I'll probably try to grab it if it's on sale. Seems interesting based on the talk.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
I wrote an article about alpha-gamers and co-op games that try to avoid that particular problem, check it out
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I wrote an article about alpha-gamers and co-op games that try to avoid that particular problem, check it out
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
AceRimmer posted:Minor edit needed, you mixed up suits and suites
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 16:59 |
|
|
I'm of a strong opinion alpha gaming is a natural result of skill disproportion among the players: were the game at the table competitive, the very same dude would be the one knocking out his turns in 10 seconds, as he had plenty of time to analyze the board while the others were pondering on their turn. While it is a negative experience and some safeguards are welcome to lessen it, getting mad at alpha gaming is just as silly as getting mad at better players beating you at a competitive game. I think a big mistake in 'fixing' the problem lies in assumption of guilt - like, some games are clearly more AP-prone than others, but in the end it takes a certain mindset to fall down the AP rabbit hole. Most proposals on fixing alpha gaming - limited information, limited communication, time pressure - are planned as sticks to be thrown in between the gears of this supposed inescapable desire to dominate the table. The real answer, I think, is very simpl: the abovementioned solutions don't work because they straightjacket the ability to alpha game per se, but rather touch the core problem at hand - they reduce one's ability to figure out the optimal solution alone, hence eliminating the very need to boss others around. Tekopo almost touched on my favorite argument for that, but kinda missed the point: have you noticed how way less prone to alpha gaming are the games where everyone has their own little deck to manage? I mean, something a step above the simple hand management of Pandemic, something where you have to think, at least occassionally, about what's left in your deck or what's stuck in the discard. loving Sentinels of the Multiverse probably count here. The thing is, having that as a mechanic doesn't really prevent anyone from alpha gaming, counting cards in everyone's discard pile and so on. However, to do so would require one to explicitly give a gently caress, consciously committing to maintaining their perfect control over the table. Which doesn't really happen - player capabilities are just muddied enough the veteran player cannot solve the board state at a glance and what actually occurs in practice is the dominant player asks a few questions every once in a while to check his estimated grasp on the current (tactical) situation, or perhaps a few strategic considerations (particular, key cards). Notice, this is pretty much what Tekopo described in the 'Character Assymetry' section: he wasn't really talking about asymmetry, as understood by each player having starkly different, complementary capabilities. Hell, Pandemic or Ghost Stories, or really probably most co-ops out there have character assymetry, which doesn't do poo poo to mitigate alpha-gameness. The thing is, in Ghost Stories et al, the particulars of said asymmetry are clear to everyone and therefore don't change the ease to compute the board state: it's just more cogs the veteran player can easily spin around in his head. Conversely, each and every example in this section touches the real core aspect: in each of these games, players are toying with their own little decks, making tracking the exact availability of everyone's capabilities (regardless of their uniqueness) difficult, unless you really care.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 17:25
|
|
