|
 90min left on the Gladius kickstarter if that is something anyone is interested in Chill la Chill posted:Clearclaw said it best: Try playing forum Mafia, where you 'meta' is basically carried onwards through your entire play history. Pain in the arse to deal with "They're not playing like they did 5 games ago" No poo poo sherlock. I have just over 100 games under my belt here on SA and it's annoying as gently caress sometimes.
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 13:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
That's an unreasonable expectation with humans, that's all I meant. Clearclaw is asking for something that isn't really possible. Maybe that person lives in an ideal world but last I checked the rest of us don't. "Should" has no place when attempting to deal with humans. Honestly, I have no idea who Clearclaw is and from what little I've read they sound absolutely unbearable. If you want your games to exist in a vacuum, just remember there is no such thing as a true vacuum. Even the interstellar medium isn't. Everything is part of reality, of the world and environments we all live in. Trying to separate yourself from any of it is fruitless. Denying reality doesn't make it any less real. Games against other humans are necessarily going to take other humans into account; they are not blank slates for the game to write upon. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, and players of those games who are perceived to have any skill at it use that knowledge. I suppose this comes down to "logical mechanics makes for good games, but humans almost never being rational actors makes for interesting ones."
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 13:35
|
|
|
Urgh I just want to play board games... Gifted my best mate a copy of Marvel Champions and I've been dying to play it with him. All official advice here in Australia is that would be currently fine to do with a small group of friends, but Mum has gone off the deep end and banned non-family from our house entirely; but I think she's being sliiiightly racist about the areas my friends live in atm. 100% ok if I go to a mates house with the exact same people though 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 13:48
|
|
|
Casnorf posted:That's an unreasonable expectation with humans, that's all I meant. Clearclaw is asking for something that isn't really possible. Maybe that person lives in an ideal world but last I checked the rest of us don't. "Should" has no place when attempting to deal with humans. Honestly, I have no idea who Clearclaw is and from what little I've read they sound absolutely unbearable. This for me is why I play more wargames than anything else. A good game is a mix of a very well meshed set of rules put in the hands of two humans who will always wind up doing things out of spite, audacity, being lucky or unlucky. A good wargame expresses this contrast between fixed logical rules and fiesty illogical players really well imo. We probably play the same lil pool of people more regularly too, so ignoring history, tells, all the stuff you can glean from a known regular opponent wouldn't even be possible for me, and I wouldn't do it if I could.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 13:59
|
|
|
Selecta84 posted:Thinking about gettin Barrage... It's a really interesting game but very heavy. Don't play it with someone who has AP because there is a ton to analyze.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 14:23
|
|
|
TBF mostly what clearclaw is talking about is "I'm going to make sure you lose this game for backstabbing me in the last game" and not playing to people's tenancies, which I think even he would admit is just good sense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 14:23
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:I was going to type out a longer reply here, but then I remembered some players are absolutely biased because of past experiences and can't easily shake it off. For those people, I agree - I would only play anonymous online games with them to remove such biases. Bleep bloop I too enjoy playing board games with my fellow human acquaintances. Like even high level Chess and Go doesn't not meet this standard.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 14:24
|
|
|
SoftNum posted:TBF mostly what clearclaw is talking about is "I'm going to make sure you lose this game for backstabbing me in the last game" This is all part of dealing with humans. We all react emotionally to things and sometimes those reactions are not what's even in our own best interests. Humans are not rational actors and expecting them to be in any given situation is just gonna leave you frustrated. If you think someone's gonna vendetta you in a future unrelated game for your treachery now, maybe it's important to consider that your choice to backhack them elicits a real emotional reaction, and must be taken into account. It is not "all just a game" and never was. Your treatment of people matters even in simulated situations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:19
|
|
|
Yes, and the metagame that carries between games suck. At least with multiple iterations in one game, you can get it out of your system as it were instead of leaving it pent up for the next game.Aramoro posted:Bleep bloop I too enjoy playing board games with my fellow human acquaintances. Well yes, and you study your opponent in fighting, etc. etc. But the point is some people need to play online anonymously, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:29
|
|
|
Casnorf posted:This is all part of dealing with humans. We all react emotionally to things and sometimes those reactions are not what's even in our own best interests. Humans are not rational actors and expecting them to be in any given situation is just gonna leave you frustrated. Right, and people who carry vendettas shouldn't play games where they can be and will be directly targeted. It's on them to make games pleasant for everyone using the rules, not on everyone else to baby them. Sniveling as a tactic is loathsome, imma put that out there right now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:35
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Right, and people who carry vendettas shouldn't play games where they can be and will be directly targeted. It's on them to make games pleasant for everyone using the rules, not on everyone else to baby them. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:36
|
|
|
SoftNum posted:TBF mostly what clearclaw is talking about is "I'm going to make sure you lose this game for backstabbing me in the last game" and not playing to people's tenancies, which I think even he would admit is just good sense. Yeah seems fair. Our group has recently had to had a conversation with each other about a guy we regularly play Civ with who is an absolute nightmare to sit next to because he just ruthlessly starts wars at every chance and is frankly a dick about it. The difficult part is that warring is perfectly in line with the game and he isn't breaking any rues and at times I do think he's being unfairly singled out because the one guy who feels victimised the most is whining because he wants to be left alone to win and is just being a baby. But generally him and the people next to him suffer and are out contention whereas the other players just breath a sigh of relief when they see they aren't next to him. I think the biggest aggravating factor is his personality is aggravating and obnoxious on top so it becomes next to impossible to apply the Clearclaw TR to him because he behaves the same way every time. Just speculating here but I think it's another reason why I think euros are so popular and that I've noticed so many people have childish reactions to anything resembling direct conflict in games currently. A lot of us grew up on Risk and Monopoly and experienced tons of zero-sum take-that gaming in childhood and then when we played games like Catan or TtR it was like, whoah, we can all sort of get along and do our things without someone punching me and that feels good. People got hooked on the passive aggressive nature of the modern euro so when you move into something with direct conflict all those old memories re-surface and suddenly it feels bad again and it provokes this immature, emotional response. Not trying to say I haven't gotten upset when someone started pounding my poo poo in but I've definitely seen some responses that have made me wonder. FulsomFrank fucked around with this message at 15:46 on Mar 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:36
|
|
|
Like, it's not at all unreasonable to say "hey sorry I kinda can't play diplomacy because I just get mad, let's play something else/I'll sit that event out", and indeed I'd respect that statement a lot. "You backstabbed me in game of thrones, so I'm going to start the game trying to bring you down in Catan" though...
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:37
|
|
|
Casnorf posted:This is all part of dealing with humans. We all react emotionally to things and sometimes those reactions are not what's even in our own best interests. Humans are not rational actors and expecting them to be in any given situation is just gonna leave you frustrated. Game theory consists of a lot of complicated math to derive logically optimal strategies and a lot of experimental studies demonstrating that those mathematically optimal solutions will never ever fly in actual human interaction, but some people will still get mad when other players refuse to conform to the math.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:43
|
|
|
I've been playing Catan since it was released in 2007, and for 7 years with the same group of dudes and we are pretty much all as good as you can get at Catan. For the most part the games come down to how the dice roll or big gambles. But there's 2 who insist on the "Well I stole from him last time so I'll steal from you this time" way of determining who to take from when placing the robber and they basically never deviate from it until one player is just clearly winning by a big margin. They recognize it's not 'optimal' but for whatever reason they just can't not play that way. It's infuriating to the 'game theory' part of my brain but hey man that's games.
Fart Car '97 fucked around with this message at 15:58 on Mar 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:55
|
|
|
Ironically my gf is much more liable to get upset at Euros. She’ll get real mad at me for taking the ship she wanted in Castles but just accepts it if I’m beating her rear end at idk Blood Bowl or whatever
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:58
|
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:Game theory consists of a lot of complicated math to derive logically optimal strategies and a lot of experimental studies demonstrating that those mathematically optimal solutions will never ever fly in actual human interaction, but some people will still get mad when other players refuse to conform to the math. The math is Good and Right. But yeah this is what makes Container interesting. There's a RPS strategy here that involves FREE MARKET, collusion, FREE MARKET, collusion, etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:58
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:I've been playing Catan for 7 years with the same group of dudes and we are pretty much all as good as you can get at Catan. For the most part the games come down to how the dice roll or big gambles. But there's 2 who insist on the "Well I stole from him last time so I'll steal from you this time" way of determining who to take from when placing the robber and they basically never deviate from it until one player is just clearly winning by a big margin. They recognize it's not 'optimal' but for whatever reason they just can't not play that way. It's infuriating to the 'game theory' part of my brain but hey man that's games. It's a valid way to play if you're pretty sure you can't read the board state enough to decide who to target. Some games are more fragile in that respect and some are less fragile, of course.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:59
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Right, and people who carry vendettas shouldn't play games where they can be and will be directly targeted. It's on them to make games pleasant for everyone using the rules, not on everyone else to baby them. It sounds like we agree, haha. Of course if you like games you might not always have a choice about what game to play. Still, the onus is on them to chill once in a while and the onus is on you to help them have fun, too. This is a big, complicated, nuanced thing, and reducing it to "you should/should not do this" isn't really fair to the other humans generally required to play games together. I rather like games in general, haha, so here's hoping my everdell expansions can be delivered at all so my wife and I can play the crap out of it while we ride out the pandemic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 15:59
|
|
|
True enough, there's nuance, but "I'm going to break the game because I'm fragile" is a person problem. And, seriously, it can ruin games. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 16:02
|
|
|
I think plenty of us complain about the local maxima puzzle nature of a certain class of euros that's being pumped out right now. I think we're all very much in agreement there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 16:02
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:It's a valid way to play if you're pretty sure you can't read the board state enough to decide who to target. Ya for sure, but there's not even an attempt to read the board state only in regards to stealing. Like we're all constantly always reading the board, except when stealing comes up in the first half and suddenly its like "ah gently caress it not even gonna try" for those two. Especially because we are well, well past the point of holding grudges & I cannot even remember the last time a person chose to make a move out of spite. I just think it's funny. E: I read an internet post written once by a CATAN CHAMPION about the big tournaments and he said grew to resent them because everyone is pretty much at the same skill level so it is almost entirely a social game played by not particularly socially-adept people. Winning is just constantly trying to do well but not so well you upset people. They play a 2-players progress / most-points-in-2-games format tournament, and a lot of the players 100% hold grudges and will gently caress you over later if you did something to them they perceived as mean or 'too much' earlier in the tournament even if it costs them points. He basically said it took all the joy out of playing the game. Fart Car '97 fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Mar 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 16:03
|
|
|
At the end of the day, anyone is entitled to be a jerk but I'm not playing with them and I'm not inviting them to my home. As I've been accused of, my gatherings are curated. If you're a jerk or obnoxious or act like a five year old when you're not winning, you're not coming. I have a friend who has had a board game meetup for years, but he thinks everyone deserves to play games. His meetups used to have 18 people with a waiting list, now he barely gets six, and the six he does get are the people no one else will play with. Toxicity in gaming is problem in video games as well, The toxic people drive away the people you really want to play it and are not worth it if you have choices. (Used to be???!) people worked during the week, and sometimes in stressful jobs with idiot people to deal with. The last thing they need is to have more idiocy on their time off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 17:43
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:The terminally online thing is a callback to an old argument as to whether Secret Hitler is good or not. The criticism of SH being it's just The Resistance but every concrete bit of information has some uncertainty added to it, and therefore the deduction is impossible. The counterpoint is in fact you're a nerd and people like an excuse to lie to friends and see if they can get away with it. i don't get what this has to do with being terminally online. like i hate secret hitler not because it makes deduction impossible, it just does needless changes to avalon and has atrocious theme-ing. "deduction is impossible" types don't really need to be terminally online? lot of those people are just like that. also are the worst.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 17:53
|
|
|
Mayveena posted:At the end of the day, anyone is entitled to be a jerk but I'm not playing with them and I'm not inviting them to my home. As I've been accused of, my gatherings are curated. If you're a jerk or obnoxious or act like a five year old when you're not winning, you're not coming. I have a friend who has had a board game meetup for years, but he thinks everyone deserves to play games. His meetups used to have 18 people with a waiting list, now he barely gets six, and the six he does get are the people no one else will play with. Toxicity in gaming is problem in video games as well, The toxic people drive away the people you really want to play it and are not worth it if you have choices. (Used to be???!) people worked during the week, and sometimes in stressful jobs with idiot people to deal with. The last thing they need is to have more idiocy on their time off. Here's a question for you though, related to what I was saying above a bit. Let's say you were holding semi-regular games of Adv Civ and there was one player who played completely within the rules of the game but everyone hated being around because of his constant warring, even if he had the greatest personality in the world (my guy doesn't) would this qualify as being a jerk in your eyes or just someone that is playing the game properly but in a super aggressive and unpopular (at least to his immediate neighbours) way?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 18:02
|
|
|
Got some store credit and our shelves are a little light on worker placement games. Raiders of the North Sea or Architects of the West Kingdom? I'd consider getting expansions with the base game for Raiders if they make a major difference. I looked at Paladins too, but looking for something with a little shorter playtime. Edit: Adding some context, we'll probably be playing either 2 player or 4 player (probably 50/50) and the players are mostly mid to high level of gaming experience with the occasionally newbie salted in. mkultra419 fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Mar 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 18:14
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:Here's a question for you though, related to what I was saying above a bit. Let's say you were holding semi-regular games of Adv Civ and there was one player who played completely within the rules of the game but everyone hated being around because of his constant warring, even if he had the greatest personality in the world (my guy doesn't) would this qualify as being a jerk in your eyes or just someone that is playing the game properly but in a super aggressive and unpopular (at least to his immediate neighbours) way? It depends on his demeanor. If he's doing it in good humor and 'everyone knows John loves to go to war' then I'd be fine with it, just warning any newbies that hey 'John loves to go to war'. If he's mean or an rear end about it then no. Adv Civ can take that kind of play, it's made to be elastic in that way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 18:18
|
|
|
mkultra419 posted:Got some store credit and our shelves are a little light on worker placement games. Raiders of the North Sea or Architects of the West Kingdom? Raiders doesn't have direct conflict, Architects does (or did? until the latest expansion which I haven't played yet). So keep that in mind when you decide.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 18:19
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:Here's a question for you though, related to what I was saying above a bit. Let's say you were holding semi-regular games of Adv Civ and there was one player who played completely within the rules of the game but everyone hated being around because of his constant warring, even if he had the greatest personality in the world (my guy doesn't) would this qualify as being a jerk in your eyes or just someone that is playing the game properly but in a super aggressive and unpopular (at least to his immediate neighbours) way? I think his reasons for playing the way he does are irrelevant because games are social and the point is to enjoy them. If nobody is enjoying playing the game because one guy is going to die on the cross of "my unfun way of playing is a longshot strategy" then gently caress em'
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 18:25
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:games are social [for all players] and the point is [for all players] to enjoy them That doesn't mean tolerate toxicity! That just means for all players to adjust each of your expectations of what enjoyment means so that everyone at the table has an opportunity to enjoy the experience. Maybe then they'll play a second game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 19:04
|
|
|
I'm about to be quarantined for a while and I'm looking for good solo board games to keep myself occupied. What are some good solo games I should look at? I already own/play solo: Mage Knight Hostage Negotiator Proving Grounds Warfighter: Shadow War
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 19:23
|
|
|
mkultra419 posted:Got some store credit and our shelves are a little light on worker placement games. Raiders of the North Sea or Architects of the West Kingdom? I haven't played Architects, but Raiders is fantastic, and the expansions are definitely worth getting. They add more options and paths to victory, without diluting the experience or making it too complicated. I'd much rather play with them than without at this point. (Base game is still fun, but once you add them in you won't want to play without them).
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 19:25
|
|
|
TheRealMcFoy posted:I'm about to be quarantined for a while and I'm looking for good solo board games to keep myself occupied. What are some good solo games I should look at? I think you could do worse grabbing GMT titles like COIN, most have solo modes. Some are even single-player!
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 19:30
|
|
|
Casnorf posted:That doesn't mean tolerate toxicity! That just means for all players to adjust each of your expectations of what enjoyment means so that everyone at the table has an opportunity to enjoy the experience. Maybe then they'll play a second game. Yes the [for all] was implied. If one player is hell bent on playing 'their way' at the cost of everyone else's enjoyment of the experience it defeats the entire point of playing in the first place, especially if the folks at the table make it known the other person is ruining the fun.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 19:32
|
|
|
TheRealMcFoy posted:I'm about to be quarantined for a while and I'm looking for good solo board games to keep myself occupied. What are some good solo games I should look at? If you love Mage Knight you will love Spirit Island.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 19:39
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:I think you could do worse grabbing GMT titles like COIN, most have solo modes. Some are even single-player! Cool, I'll look into that. I do like counter-insurgency ops and have looked at A Distant Plain and Fire in the Lake before. Lord Of Texas posted:If you love Mage Knight you will love Spirit Island. I'll check that one out too. I've seen a bunch of people sing its praises on reddit, but havn't looked into how it plays yet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 19:41
|
|
|
Spirit Island is so good. I’ve been working through every spirit solo in preparation for Jagged Earth. Looks great too. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 19:47
|
|
|
What kind of sick monster uses blue for Vital Strength of the Earth
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Spirit Island is so good. I’ve been working through every spirit solo in preparation for Jagged Earth. Looks great too. BGG is blocked at work, along with all the publisher sites and youtube. Can you give me a real basic overview of the primary mechanics?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 19:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
I don’t know why, but for some reason I get the sense that hating social deduction games and supporting Hypothetical Civ Warmonger are correlated.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 19:50
|
|
