|
outlier posted:That's the sort of game it is: you can never be quite sure of the outcome. Can your d8 ship outrun a d6 one? Probably. Can your d8 laser punch through a d10 shield? Probably not. It's not elegant, but it is very deliberate. Space empires 4x 
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 17:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 15:12 |
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:And roll to resolve rule disputes. Roll to resolve disputes!!!!!!!!!!!! The game has plenty of faults, but this is the silliest one. How often do rule disputes come up in games now? I've played this a dozen times, and we've had zero rules disputes. The rules may be questionable (as in, bad) in places, but I haven't seen any actual disputes arise. The expansion cleared up a bunch of the base game problems, and it's a game you should probably use a few choice houserules to improve things. It's definitely an oldschool kind of game though, and could have been done a bit better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 22:27
|
|
|
Ravendas posted:Roll to resolve disputes!!!!!!!!!!!! I never understand how this works in any game, it seems like it would incentivize the worst kind of lovely rules lawyering. "Ok, I'm gonna dispute that the queen can move diagonally. Let's roll for it."
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
If you ever find yourself playing someone who picks fights to have a 1/20th of a chance to score a point, stand not on the order of your going but go immediately. It's like Charterstone lacking a next player rule: it will never come up, but it's a neat thing to point to to sum up why the game's hosed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 23:07
|
|
|
I can't speak for Xia having not played it, but rules disputes often come up in games with a tooon of book keeping. You'll see it especially in Vlaada games where the rules suggest you should do your bookkeeping simultaneously while other people are playing but technically that person can do something where timing matters and I've seen scenarios where you're choosing your next hand or whatever and another player is like "you wouldn't have held the counterspell card unless you knew John was going to attack you." Which is my argument for "elegant" designs. Few things more frustrating than waiting for someone to finish fiddling with their cards when it isn't their turn.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
If you're gonna do ameritrash dice chucking in your game, at least have the decency to do it on some sort of bell curve.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 23:14
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:If you ever find yourself playing someone who picks fights to have a 1/20th of a chance to score a point, stand not on the order of your going but go immediately. I recognize this and hold myself back out of fear of losing friends, but in a game that incentivized it I would constantly find myself thinking "I could just rule challenge that and roll for it" and that would distract me from all other valid strategies and I'd drown in analysis paralysis
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:It's like Charterstone lacking a next player rule: it will never come up, but it's a neat thing to point to to sum up why the game's hosed. Except that’s not why a charterstone is kind of a meh game. The rules are fine There’s just not very much there. Maybe it comes later but 4 games in and I wish we were playing anything else.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:Except that’s not why a charterstone is kind of a meh game. The rules are fine More does happen, but there's not too much meat at the core. It's important to make sure the game goes quickly - we finished our games in ~45mins to 1 hour each, and it never really overstayed its welcome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 00:37
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:If you ever find yourself playing someone who picks fights to have a 1/20th of a chance to score a point, stand not on the order of your going but go immediately. The point isn't that they could score a point, but that the high roller now literally sets the rules. Since this rule is codified, it allows a player to challenge every rule and fundamentally change the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 00:56
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:The point isn't that they could score a point, but that the high roller now literally sets the rules. Since this rule is codified, it allows a player to challenge every rule and fundamentally change the game. Protip: Don't play with people like that. So much handwringing over things that will never happen. Scyther posted:If you're gonna do ameritrash dice chucking in your game, at least have the decency to do it on some sort of bell curve. The engines all have three 'uses', and the engine size determines the die, 1d6/1d8/1d12, so it is a bell curve during your turn, plus a static Impulse speed you get on top of that, which is another 2-4 spaces depending on your ship. The expansion added engine boosters, which are cheap and when attached to an engine raises it's min value by 2. Tripling your minimum roll makes it a very handy thing that most people buy if they have room for it. It also added blaster boosters so you can actually cut through shields, and shield boosters which work against environmental effects, so you don't get hosed while mining with some bad rolls if you pay for this item. The base game had a ton of issues, but the expansion cleared a bunch up. It's still not elegant whatsoever, but it's much more playable. What's funny is this game just popped up on kickstarter again to fund the 2nd printing of the expansion, as well as a brand new deck of 4 new mission types, and 21 cards for new powers for the ships. $15 or something for that mini card expansion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:The point isn't that they could score a point, but that the high roller now literally sets the rules. Since this rule is codified, it allows a player to challenge every rule and fundamentally change the game. Not to defend Xia, but I did think the "roll a die to resolve disputes" only applied in cases where the rules were ambiguous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 01:41
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:Except that’s not why a charterstone is kind of a meh game. The rules are fine I've never played it, but it's weird to me that Charterstone is somehow less mechanically interesting than Risk.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 01:56
|
|
|
Ravendas posted:Protip: Don't play with people like that. Protip: don't play Xia. It has poo poo rules.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 02:50
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Not to defend Xia, but I did think the "roll a die to resolve disputes" only applied in cases where the rules were ambiguous. Yeah, I'm no fan of Xia either, but this is a slightly weird hang-up. Back before everyone had the internet on their phones, using a D6 to resolve a rules dispute was the done thing; just keep the game flowing and try to find out the proper answer the next day. Hell, every now and again it still happens if a rule question can't be answered fast enough. Do you guys answer rules disputes with pistols at dawn or something?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 03:34
|
|
|
Ubik_Lives posted:Yeah, I'm no fan of Xia either, but this is a slightly weird hang-up. Back before everyone had the internet on their phones, using a D6 to resolve a rules dispute was the done thing; just keep the game flowing and try to find out the proper answer the next day. Hell, every now and again it still happens if a rule question can't be answered fast enough. Do you guys answer rules disputes with pistols at dawn or something? Generally one of us mixes a new round of drinks while someone else looks up the rule on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 03:36
|
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:More does happen, but there's not too much meat at the core. It's important to make sure the game goes quickly - we finished our games in ~45mins to 1 hour each, and it never really overstayed its welcome. Games three and four took like 4 hours (2 hrs per) and I was about ready to just walk out. It helps that we had a bit of a “don’t say offensive poo poo” incident in the middle of the game. The risk of playing with people from meet ups. That put a bit of a damper on the rest of the night.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 03:39
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:Games three and four took like 4 hours (2 hrs per) and I was about ready to just walk out. Eeeesh that sounds miserable. We just finished game 4, but it's two couples, we all know eachother p well, live in the same town, don't get together enough for games so this is a great catalyst, and we're all having a blast.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 04:11
|
|
|
Played some 18CZ for the first time today, 3 player. Thoroughly impressed with it. Of 1830, 1846, 18MEX and 18CZ that I have played 18CZ is by far my favorite. The gameplay is a lot more open than 1830 for example. There's quite a bit more decisions to make. Not to knock 1830. It's a beautiful game. But with small, medium, and large companies the decision tree gets expanded so much that let's just say that if someone were creating a bot to solve the 18XX games they're gonna solve 1830 way before 18CZ. 1830 is to 18CZ what limit holdem is to no -limit holdem. I'll play 1830 any day of the week, but I'll be dreaming of 18CZ while I do it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 04:52
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:Games three and four took like 4 hours (2 hrs per) and I was about ready to just walk out. Is that incident related to the game?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 04:58
|
|
|
al-azad posted:Is that incident related to the game? Nah. It’s related to one of the players. Called him out fairly hard on what he said and he basically didn’t talk for half an hour. Which was an improvement, but it slowed the game down a bit because he was sulking instead of paying attention.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 05:07
|
|
|
One of the tuckboxes contains a full copy of Cards Against Humanity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 05:14
|
|
|
I would never want to play a legacy game with people from meetups or gaming groups. Since those are the only people I can ever play with, I've never played a legacy game!
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 05:30
|
|
|
Played 1830 today. A 3-player game, took us around 8.5 hours. I ended up holding two companies (10 and 8 shares) that had slipped into the brown zone, and carefully withholding so as to keep them at the point where I can hold them, and a lot of train shuffling. C&O was one of them, I had been keeping it unable to run any routes so it didn't need a train. But when it hit brown our track fights switched from (make rc have a legal route) to (keep C&O out of the network). The player with B&O was doing something similar, though unintentionally at first - he forgot to keep enough money to build tunnels, and then it was diesel time so he kept it isolated. Eventually we forced him to connect it, he bought a diesel, but had to sell some shares to do it and it hit brown. Yoink! Final scores around 13400, 13400, 10000 - I lost by $3 which is well within accounting errors. Though I also waited until the last SR to buy the last remaining stocks in the winner's companies for fear of dumping, but dumping would have cost him too much time and effort I'm pretty sure - so I ended up paying more for them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 06:19
|
|
|
Let's pretend you have an upcoming three weeks stay with your inlaws who don't share a common language with you. My wife can be on hand to explain the rules, but then after that, it's just playing the game with no language requirements, either written or spoken, with rules simple enough explanations aren't needed really after the initial setup. There will be times where it's just me and another, and times where I might have eight people or so, so player numbers aren't super important. Small and light is a big bonus, because luggage space is tight. These are also definitely not gamers, but my last trip I brought Carcassonne and it was a hit. Enough so I gifted them my copy. From my collection I'm thinking: Cash 'n Guns. The cards are just images and numbers, waving guns around doesn't require much shared language. Kingdomino Hanamikoji Animal Upon Animal (easy, small, and there will be some kids there) Capital Lux Sushi Go. I don't have Party yet, is it low enough on language to be playable? Probably too big: Ticket to Ride
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 06:33
|
|
|
Ravendas posted:Let's pretend you have an upcoming three weeks stay with your inlaws who don't share a common language with you. My wife can be on hand to explain the rules, but then after that, it's just playing the game with no language requirements, either written or spoken, with rules simple enough explanations aren't needed really after the initial setup. There will be times where it's just me and another, and times where I might have eight people or so, so player numbers aren't super important. Small and light is a big bonus, because luggage space is tight. If Ticket to Ride is too big then Mysterium is too big, which is a shame because if you played the Ghost you're literally required not to speak and the only question you'll be asked is "Am I right?" (It also doesn't hold eight, but you could have two players buddy up at a pinch.) Internal Affairs is a good one for 6-8 and the only language required is being able to count to 15. Between Two Cities is completely language independent and plays 3-7. Jordan7hm posted:Games three and four took like 4 hours (2 hrs per) and I was about ready to just walk out. Ye gods, what were you doing? The longest any of our games took was 90 minutes, and that one had a special rule attached. Game 3 you shouldn't even have 42 buildings yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 10:14
|
|
|
It's not small and light but plays from 2-6 - flamme rouge?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 10:22
|
|
|
Ravendas posted:Let's pretend you have an upcoming three weeks stay with your inlaws who don't share a common language with you. My wife can be on hand to explain the rules, but then after that, it's just playing the game with no language requirements, either written or spoken, with rules simple enough explanations aren't needed really after the initial setup. There will be times where it's just me and another, and times where I might have eight people or so, so player numbers aren't super important. Small and light is a big bonus, because luggage space is tight. Hive Pocket is your friend. Also Battle Line, Coup (as long as everyone can agree on the names of all the cards), Escape From the Aliens in Outer Space (just make the PnP, crazy portable), Patchwork, Condottiere (only if you have 4-6 people), For Sale, and Jaipur. If you have enough language skill to act cooperatively, Escape Curse of the Temple packs up super small. Or Hanabi, even though personally I dislike it. Or one of the most portable games in the world, Skull & Roses, because you can play it with just about anything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 11:58
|
|
|
Camel Up? The pyramid and board are the bulkiest components, everything else is little cardboard/wood. Language independent once you explain the rules, on a given turn a player just chooses 1 of 4 possible actions, plays to 8 people, and is probably easily explained even to (probably double-digits) kids. Betting on camel races could be a simple theme to understand too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 12:08
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:What're the best games to play with friends that don't stifle non-game conversation? That is to say, a game to play as an accompaniment to light conversation instead of a replacement. Codenames. Codenames is basically "downtime: the game". Two players at a time will be deep in thought, and will want to be deep in thought a long time, and there's literally nothing for everyone else at the table to do but chat. And it's actually a decent game despite this!
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 12:26
|
|
|
Ubik_Lives posted:Yeah, I'm no fan of Xia either, but this is a slightly weird hang-up. Back before everyone had the internet on their phones, using a D6 to resolve a rules dispute was the done thing; just keep the game flowing and try to find out the proper answer the next day. Hell, every now and again it still happens if a rule question can't be answered fast enough. Do you guys answer rules disputes with pistols at dawn or something? We usually first try to reason it out by careful reading of the rule in question, failing that: look it up online real quick. If neither is viable we make a group consensus call, with some deference to the more experienced player(s)/game owner/person whose house it is, whatever seems appropriate to the situation. If people want to roll to resolve disputes, that's fine, but codifying it in the rules as "this is what you do" is a different story, especially when that rule by every logical interpretation also interacts with the "free vp when you roll a 20" rule, and it's absolutely something that the game deserves ridicule for.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 14:23
|
|
|
Cthulhu Dreams posted:It's not small and light but plays from 2-6 - flamme rouge? I thought Flamme Rouge capped at four.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 14:33
|
|
|
Please tell me stuff about Tulip Bubble.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 14:39
|
|
|
Selecta84 posted:Please tell me stuff about Tulip Bubble. It's a bit of a bust, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 15:40
|
|
|
Jedit posted:It's a bit of a bust, honestly. :-( I read that it is a nice little auction game. What makes it bad?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 15:54
|
|
|
Jedit posted:I thought Flamme Rouge capped at four. Expansion takes it to 6 and introduces new road types. Technically it takes it up to 12 if you play the 'one cyclist per player' variant too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 16:32
|
|
|
What are people's opinions on Trickerion?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 16:33
|
|
|
Scyther posted:If people want to roll to resolve disputes, that's fine, but codifying it in the rules as "this is what you do" is a different story, especially when that rule by every logical interpretation also interacts with the "free vp when you roll a 20" rule, and it's absolutely something that the game deserves ridicule for. The best logical interpretation is that the roll to resolve a rules dispute between two or more players is not any one player's roll, so no one gets a VP if it comes up 20. If someone really wants to make the case that they should get rewarded for rolling that die, you probably shouldn't be playing games with them in the first place (then again, you already got suckered into playing Xia, sooo) !Klams posted:Codenames. Codenames is basically "downtime: the game". Two players at a time will be deep in thought, and will want to be deep in thought a long time, and there's literally nothing for everyone else at the table to do but chat. How's life in the land without cellphones?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 16:35
|
|
|
Winter Stormer posted:How's life in the land without cellphones? Yeah, I mean fine, there's literally everything else in the world other than 'play that game of codenames' for those other players to do, but I didn't think that was as helpful a comment given the context.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 16:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 15:12 |
|
|
Winter Stormer posted:The best logical interpretation is that the roll to resolve a rules dispute between two or more players is not any one player's roll, so no one gets a VP if it comes up 20. If someone really wants to make the case that they should get rewarded for rolling that die, you probably shouldn't be playing games with them in the first place (then again, you already got suckered into playing Xia, sooo) I disagree with this rules interpretation. Wanna roll for it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 16:43
|
|