|
Ubik_Lives posted:I was a bit worried about this as a fix for the monkey. I always thought the main issue with the monkey wasn't the fixed tiebreaker, but their ability to chain and how unavoidable they are. If the monkey got changed so their action was a dusk action, and was "Before collecting treasure, pass all curse tokens to the next highest pirate on the ship", the dusk rules change so everyone stays on the ship until all dusk actions are complete barring Spanish officers, and the monkey gets bumped up to rank 6 or so, it would fix a bunch of issues . The monkeys can no longer chain pass curses to someone. You can try to avoid them buy either getting above other people between you and the monkeys, or go below them, or Spanish officer your way off the ship. And monkeys are no longer a safe last round play if everyone else decides to duck under them and hit them with beggars, so people are more likely to try to play them earlier, giving people time to deal with the curses. Oh there's no monkey anymore. But even without that we played 2 games and people were counted out in the first week both games. In the second game.id managed to get a 20 point lead over second place because I was last on the reputation track so all my Day abilities went first, no way to be caught on the 3rd week. So there are still blowouts but not monkey induced so less funny.
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 07:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 03:01 |
|
|
Magnetic North posted:Hey, thanks for reading the OP. I hope it was helpful. It was a lot of work. For sure — I appreciate the pains taken to help me avoid potential pitfalls. And thank you everyone for the advice. I didn't consider enough on my first look through that auction style games have an interesting mechanic that may have some advantage for my situation. Going to dig through the recommendations to try to get a better feel.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 16:02
|
|
|
Ubik_Lives posted:I know the monkeys aren't the only tiebreaker issue card, but I feel like they were the worst offender by a long margin, and you didn't need an entire new rule system to deal with them. It mostly bothered us that the tie breakers were hidden. But when we tried ways to fix that, it didn't make the game better. In the end, this is mostly a "naked" hidden action selection game, and hidden/simultaneous selection is a luck mechanism (despite what the Dave Sirlin hyper gamelords might think). Magnifying that, this is a very swingy game, where a few wrong calls can set you way behind. To me the "fix" for Libertalia isn't trying to change all that and make it into some deep skill game - I think the fix is to make it shorter and less complicated. Something you can play a bunch of rounds and not worry too much about - like you'd play other "high luck" sorts of games.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 16:35
|
|
|
Libertalia definitely feels like it’s in this anti-sweet spot of length and swinginess where the whole game is anxiety-inducing to an unfun degree because it feels extremely easy to have setbacks you won’t predict that you’ll still be feeling 40 minutes later, with the clearest way to reduce the odds of those setbacks being to memorize absolutely every card that every other player still has available, which is a lot more work than I want to put into a game like that
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 17:33
|
|
|
jmzero posted:hidden/simultaneous selection is a luck mechanism (despite what the Dave Sirlin hyper gamelords might think). I mean it depends on how many options are available and how many trials you have in a particular game but I will die on the hill that simultaneous selection is like poker: skill based with variance, but it's not luck. I have no idea what this game is like though this is me going to bat for Yomi because Sirloin came up
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 17:43
|
|
|
What are some board games that have been effectively "solved"? I'm not sure of a better word for it. Basically any kind of game where if a player follows an exact set of instructions will always end up winning.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 17:54
|
|
|
FirstAidKite posted:What are some board games that have been effectively "solved"? I'm not sure of a better word for it. Basically any kind of game where if a player follows an exact set of instructions will always end up winning. Tic tac toe. Maybe checkers? Most popular games probably can't be solved because they have too many random elements or too many players.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:02
|
|
|
I've heard Hive had been solved but not something I know personally.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:06
|
|
|
FirstAidKite posted:What are some board games that have been effectively "solved"? I'm not sure of a better word for it. Basically any kind of game where if a player follows an exact set of instructions will always end up winning. Checkers. Probably connect 4. Winning or drawing, I assume you mean, since (for example) tic tac toe is solved, but is a draw with perfect play.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:07
|
|
|
I dunno about solved but I remember a big thing about A Few Acres Of Snow and the Halifax Hammer being a big dominant strategy that made the game one sided but I don't know anything about it
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:11
|
|
|
FirstAidKite posted:What are some board games that have been effectively "solved"? I'm not sure of a better word for it. Basically any kind of game where if a player follows an exact set of instructions will always end up winning. Lots of claims of solving but nearly every time it's actually group think.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:16
|
|
|
Mancala is also solved iirc. basically folk games with no luck tend to get solved if they're simple enough. Designer boardgames rarely get properly solved. The only one i know that has a surefire strategy the first 3-4 players can do to win (depending on set up) is Mafia de Cuba. The first player takes a role that's loyal to the boss, and removes the one role that kills the boss if accused. Subsequent players take the other roles loyal to the boss. The boss can then safely accuse all the remaining players. The Halifax Hammer is because Wallace designed a deckbuilder where you beseige cities by locking up cards out of your deck. In deckbuilding terms, this is known as thinning, and it let's you play your good cards more often.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:19
|
|
|
Guess Who also has a strategy that maths out to a 96% win rate. https://youtu.be/FRlbNOno5VA
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:24
|
|
|
FirstAidKite posted:What are some board games that have been effectively "solved"? I'm not sure of a better word for it. Basically any kind of game where if a player follows an exact set of instructions will always end up winning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solved_game Checkers is the most complex game that is fully solved (with perfect play by both players it ends in a draw). Tournament checkers play uses slightly altered starting positions, which have not been solved. A Few Acres of Snow as Glagha mentioned is probably the best example of a modern board game with an overly dominant strategy, although I think more recently people finally figured out how to counter it to some degree. Truly solving a game of any complexity requires a ton of math and computation, which is made more difficult by setup variance and randomness.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:29
|
|
|
On a related subject, the anglosphere wargamers thought they knew how best to play Twilight Struggle, and it involved rarely using the space race track. Then the video game implementation came out which removed all of the barriers to playing against Chinese wargamers and it turned out they space cards all the time and win a lot. There's probably a better write-up out there, I've not actually played the game. Sankt was the name of one of the best Chinese players iirc.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:38
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Checkers. Probably connect 4. Connect 4 has been solved, yes; with perfect play the first player always wins.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:40
|
|
|
Isn't Shadows Over Camelot effectively solved for all intents and purposes in that if the team plays a certain way they will win every time no matter what the traitor does?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:53
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:On a related subject, the anglosphere wargamers thought they knew how best to play Twilight Struggle, and it involved rarely using the space race track. Then the video game implementation came out which removed all of the barriers to playing against Chinese wargamers and it turned out they space cards all the time and win a lot. There's probably a better write-up out there, I've not actually played the game. Sankt was the name of one of the best Chinese players iirc. Yeah that was a cool display of metas being broken wide open. The same happens in competitive video games a lot more often than board games because other than CCGs and Warhammer there's not really a strong competitive scene in board gaming, just a few small niche communities playing thousands of games of Dominion, RftG, Terra Mystica, and Twilight Struggle*. Dominion has the common pitfall of new players learning Big Money and thinking it's solved, but that's just a beginner strategy that's easy to execute and nowhere near the dominant one. A Few Acres of Snow was "solved" with a completely broken strategy that had to be errata'd out. Don't really know of any others. *BGA has made a lot more games fit this category now I think.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:On a related subject, the anglosphere wargamers thought they knew how best to play Twilight Struggle, and it involved rarely using the space race track. Then the video game implementation came out which removed all of the barriers to playing against Chinese wargamers and it turned out they space cards all the time and win a lot. There's probably a better write-up out there, I've not actually played the game. Sankt was the name of one of the best Chinese players iirc. Some years back someone did a Let's Play of the Steam version that goes fairly deep into the game's strategy and the nuances of the Chinese approach versus the traditional Western strategy.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 18:59
|
|
|
Original Axis and Allies (Spring 1942) was unwinnable by the Allies if the Axis understood how to play their side well. There's dice rolls so there's an element of chance, but there's so many dice rolls that the bell curve of results eventually wins out. The Axis starts with more units, the Allies with more production capacity, but the Axis can always stab for Moscow and capture Russia's production faster than the Allies can produce units to stop them, and once they have Russia, they'll outproduce the Allies as well. I think this is less of a "solved game" than an "inherently unbalanced game" that needed tweaking to balance. I bet there's other examples.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 21:52
|
|
|
Oh hey, so, you lovely awesome people often chat in here about Root, so when I saw it at the bring and buy sale, brand new for 25 quid I thought I'd give it a punt. I noticed its only 4 player, and our group is usually more. I thought I'd have a look and see if there's an expansion, and if there was an expansion, if it raised the player count. Well. There certainly IS an expansion! Wasn't quite ready for that! I haven't had time to do a deep dive yet, (still haven't even played it yet!) but, if any of you wouldn't mind giving me a run down I'd love to hear your opinions on them / which ones are actually worth it? Obviously I'll play the game some first, but I suspect some of our group will object to some of it and it would be good to know in advance which aspects can be'fixed' with expansions!
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 22:30
|
|
|
Plenty of good play out of the core box. The game only really works at 3 and 4, so skip the solo bot clockwork expansions and 2p. It’s still great at 3p, use all factions but the vagabond. The first expansion (Riverfolk) is the only essential one. The Otters really complete the base game and make a great replacement for the Vagabond at 4p. The Lizards are a weirder and harder to play faction generally, but slot in well. If you’re still getting it to the table a lot, then add the Underworld expansion for the new double sided map and new deck, both of which are great. The factions are a side bonus as neither feel essential and one is severely underpowered despite having a fun shell game gimmick. The latest expansion is the Marauders and is just hitting KS backers delivery so no consensus on that yet. It has two more factions and Hirelings (mini factions you can hire or sway to get new abilities) and Landmarks (map based objectives to fight over). Seems solid so far.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 22:55
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Plenty of good play out of the core box. The game only really works at 3 and 4, so skip the solo bot clockwork expansions and 2p. It’s still great at 3p, use all factions but the vagabond. Amazing, thanks so much! Will have a look at the river folk then!
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 02:26
|
|
|
coincidentally my copy of Marauders just today arrived
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 02:32
|
|
|
Glagha posted:I mean it depends on how many options are available and how many trials you have in a particular game but I will die on the hill that simultaneous selection is like poker: skill based with variance, but it's not luck. I have no idea what this game is like though this is me going to bat for Yomi because Sirloin came up Sure - all of Poker, Libertalia, and Yomi have skill certainly. And they all have significant luck inputs. Those are two separate measures. The optimal strategy for a given position in a simultaneous action selection game (or a game with hidden information, which are closely related) is usually going to resolve to a probability equilibrium - but playing by that equilibrium will pay off differently depending on luck (given a reasonable opponent, anyway). None of that is to say you can't make a wrong move, weight options incorrectly, or fail to take advantage of a poor/predictable opponent in these games. Poker is absolutely a high skill game, and Yomi and Libertalia almost certainly are. One way Poker is (at least to me) much better than Libertalia (or Pandante, going back to Sirlin) is that you usually play more "hands" (or equivalent) - giving your "skill" signal more opportunity to overcome the "luck" noise. This is one of the reasons I think Libertalia could do with being shorter. jmzero fucked around with this message at 02:37 on May 11, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 02:35
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Original Axis and Allies (Spring 1942) was unwinnable by the Allies if the Axis understood how to play their side well. There's dice rolls so there's an element of chance, but there's so many dice rolls that the bell curve of results eventually wins out. The Axis starts with more units, the Allies with more production capacity, but the Axis can always stab for Moscow and capture Russia's production faster than the Allies can produce units to stop them, and once they have Russia, they'll outproduce the Allies as well. My recollection was that the allies were overpowered and Russia could stall the Axis indefinitely by spamming infantry, to the point that limiting Russia's ability to mass produce infantry was a popular variant.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 02:58
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:coincidentally my copy of Marauders just today arrived Mine was supposed to arrive on Friday, except I got a delivery slip on my door and a Staples address that told me they had no idea wtf the slip was for, then the tracking updated to tell me that the package was still in the US, then it spent a few days travelling around the state of NY while being delayed a few times, then it finally reached my city and was out for delivery today but the driver didn't bother buzzing my apartment so no game for me yet 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 03:19
|
|
|
Has anyone played the app version of Root async? Does it work alright?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 09:40
|
|
|
jmzero posted:Sure - all of Poker, Libertalia, and Yomi have skill certainly. And they all have significant luck inputs. Those are two separate measures. What do you consider to be the luck element in Libertalia, assuming perfect knowledge of the cards or new Libertalia where tiebreakers are public? Really it's only initial card selection that all your cards have poor tiebreakers for the card they have, either high or low, and that's a fairly rare thing to happen. Aramoro fucked around with this message at 10:00 on May 11, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 09:53
|
|
|
Sat down tonight and finally merged TI + POK together, as I have a 6p game scheduled this Saturday. Christ there's a lot of stuff  A lot bit of creative box arrangement and everything is sleeved, and every race is in their own individual bags    Love a good sandwich bag~ re:Libertalia chat. NRB posted a Lets Play earlier today, and I've yet to sit down and watch it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LN8n9hww6BU
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 13:44
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:The first expansion (Riverfolk) is the only essential one. The Otters really complete the base game and make a great replacement for the Vagabond at 4p. The Lizards are a weirder and harder to play faction generally, but slot in well. If I can push back on this a little bit, I think that Riverfolk might not be the ideal first expansion. If you have a solid group of players who will definitely be playing quite a bit, I think it's more tenable, but the Otters that Bottom Liner talks about rely really heavily on everyone at the table knowing the cards in the deck very well. I find that the learning process for Root tends to be a) learning your faction and the general rules b) learning the other factions over several games c) learning the deck. For this reason, if you're not likely to play the game with a recurring group, the Otters are going to be severely handicapped because new players tend not to understand in their first games what the value of the cards is. The second expansion, Underworld, includes one faction that makes 2 player a bit more interesting, two additional maps. The new deck (Exiles and Partisans) is probably the cheapest and best upgrade you can make. The jury is still out on the brand new expansion (Marauders) which is really geared towards making the 2 player game truly feasible.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 14:06
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:If I can push back on this a little bit, I think that Riverfolk might not be the ideal first expansion. If you have a solid group of players who will definitely be playing quite a bit, I think it's more tenable, but the Otters that Bottom Liner talks about rely really heavily on everyone at the table knowing the cards in the deck very well. I find that the learning process for Root tends to be a) learning your faction and the general rules b) learning the other factions over several games c) learning the deck. For this reason, if you're not likely to play the game with a recurring group, the Otters are going to be severely handicapped because new players tend not to understand in their first games what the value of the cards is. I've played half a dozen games and I still don't understand the value of cards. I tend to not think about them (except for the ones that obliterate all other tokens or whatever) Surprise! I am bad at the game.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 14:26
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:I've played half a dozen games and I still don't understand the value of cards. I tend to not think about them (except for the ones that obliterate all other tokens or whatever) Root is a total disaster for me and maybe it's the art and maybe it's the theme but it is just a mess to wrap my head around (let alone teach) that breaks my brain and prevents me from forming any serious strategy. Maybe in a dedicated group that gets it on the table consistently (my kingdom for one...) but I just cannot grok it well enough. Oath took that to 11 as far as I'm concerned. All this talk is making me want to try it again.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 15:38
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:Root is a total disaster for me and maybe it's the art and maybe it's the theme but it is just a mess to wrap my head around (let alone teach) that breaks my brain and prevents me from forming any serious strategy. Maybe in a dedicated group that gets it on the table consistently (my kingdom for one...) but I just cannot grok it well enough. Oath took that to 11 as far as I'm concerned. All this talk is making me want to try it again. I am loath to suggest someone buy a digital game if they aren't sure they like the analog game, but the computer assistance elp might lighten the cognitive load. There are additional issues too: you either need to play against non-great AIs (which might be better by now but I doubt it), total randos who might be entrenched and hardcore, or buy multiple copies (which is still probably less than the cost of a physical copy, depending on sales, shipping, etc) and cajole some friends into it.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 15:49
|
|
|
I feel like if my friends aren't willing to buy copies then they aren't interested enough to waste money on.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 15:58
|
|
|
Magnetic North posted:I am loath to suggest someone buy a digital game if they aren't sure they like the analog game, but the computer assistance elp might lighten the cognitive load. There are additional issues too: you either need to play against non-great AIs (which might be better by now but I doubt it), total randos who might be entrenched and hardcore, or buy multiple copies (which is still probably less than the cost of a physical copy, depending on sales, shipping, etc) and cajole some friends into it. I would grab the digital on sale and play AIs. I'm past the point in life of playing games online with random people for the most part. Just need to convince some other people around me who are equally as confuzzled by it to learn (again) with me. Just tough in a world where I can throw down a nice 18xx instead... This may sound crazy but I honestly think COIN is easier to wrap your (my) head around. Sure, factions behave differently but generally have more overlap outside of some specific issues/gimmicks and the central mechanic of operating off the event card being flipped every round is fairly easy to understand-ish. But tougher to sell "Let's re-create the pacification of Gaul!" than cute woodland creatures fighting in a forest.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 16:04
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:This may sound crazy but I honestly think COIN is easier to wrap your (my) head around. Sure, factions behave differently but generally have more overlap outside of some specific issues/gimmicks and the central mechanic of operating off the event card being flipped every round is fairly easy to understand-ish. But tougher to sell "Let's re-create the pacification of Gaul!" than cute woodland creatures fighting in a forest.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 16:15
|
|
|
CitizenKeen posted:I point out to a friend and fellow goon constantly how much theming matters. (Not that they're unaware, it's just a horse I like to beat.) Who cares about history (doomed to repeat it, yadda yadda yadda). Pax Pamir is a great game, but that theme is the worst. Give me pew-pew lasers and elves and mechs and cats and ninjas. An Infamous Traffic? John Company? And then you make a game about a racoon with a bow and arrow and BOOM a dozen expansions. Not everyone likes to be reminded of history and real life all the time. Board games are meant to be entertaining at the end of the day so I can relate to wanting a sci fi or fantasy setting. Myself, tbh I'm kind of tired of the Europe focused elves/dwarves/orcs stuff and wish there were more mythologies of other cultures to play with.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
LifeLynx posted:Creature Comforts: I've played this two and a half times. It is definitely a lot more complex than it seemed when first looking into it. Changing over everything was a good memory test but not too challenging for two people who are both good at that crunchy side of things. There are so many pieces that large parts feel imbalanced. I could go a whole game and never need or even want two out of five resources, while everyone would want a couple of the others on every turn. There are so many options for what to create that it is difficult to know what to pick. It is also a big challenge for younger kids (one is around 10) since there are so many interactions. Timing and age seemed way lower on the box than in reality. I would budget a couple of hours for the first game, especially if you have a bigger party. I did enjoy the dice mechanics, it felt like you were far more likely to have extra dice with nothing to do than trying and failing to collect something. I want to play through it a couple more times to really get a feel for everything. The rules are clearly laid out and it feels like a game that would be great for kids if a bunch of the systems were removed or simplified.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 17:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 03:01 |
|
|
Aramoro posted:What do you consider to be the luck element in Libertalia, assuming perfect knowledge of the cards or new Libertalia where tiebreakers are public? Really it's only initial card selection that all your cards have poor tiebreakers for the card they have, either high or low, and that's a fairly rare thing to happen. Consider a particular setup on your first turn. I'm player B, the treasure showing is X, etc... Suppose you decide that, in that situation, the best move is Y, so you always do Y. This doesn't work. Your opponents, knowing that you would always do Y in this situation, could use that knowledge to counter that strategy. So you need to be able to "mix up" your choices to not be predictable. Glossing over a lot of theory, this ends with the the game theory optimal move being not one move, but a weighted set of options (a Nash equilibrium). So maybe in Libertalia situation X, you should effectively play card Y 80% of the time and card Z 20% of the time. To be clear, this game-theory-optimal strategy doesn't guarantee wins - it just maximizes your odds of good outcomes (given an opponent who is also playing well). Because of this, hidden/simultaneous action will involve some luck (when played with realistic opponents). Which is not to say there's not also skill - there's tons of skill involved in deciding appropriate weightings, and also in terms of identifying tendencies in opponents who are unlikely to be playing optimally themselves. By contrast, the "Dave Sirlin hyper gamelord" view, that I sometimes see, is that in perfect play you'd always be able to make the "hard read". That, for example, you could or should always be one step ahead in reading your opponent in a "he thinks that I think that he thinks that I think I'll do X, so I'll do Y" Iocaine powder game. This is a pleasant fantasy for some gigantic egos, but is not viable given realistic opponents. That's not to say these reads don't happen, just that they shouldn't be expected to be the norm. In the end there's usually going to be some luck involved. jmzero fucked around with this message at 18:32 on May 11, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 18:29
|
|