|
Perry Mason Jar posted:One table had Marvel Champions going which I've been itching to try but they were capped at 4. Don't think they managed to finish the game. It's always compared to Arkham Horror TCG, what does the thread favor? If I pick up either - not any time soon - I'll be eyeing whichever plays better solo since the LGS has most multiplayer covered and I can only get friends and family to the table once a week or every other week (usually for two players) besides the holidays. In my one trial game of each AH seemed a lot more interesting, but maybe MC picks up after a few games. There's a thread for LCGs if you want more educated opinions (edit: not that the topic is banned here or anything).
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 04:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 14:42 |
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:BGN report from earlier this week. That’s the idea, it’s a game about lollin when other peoples pots blow up, immediately before hitting your 1-in-11-or-wait-was-it-9-poo poo-what’s-in-this-bag-again chance to blow yourself
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 05:20
|
|
|
TheDiceMustRoll posted:Anyone got thoughts on Foundations of Rome? I like the theme, I like the miniatures and the gameplay I've seen makes it seem like not as overly complicated as say, Dungeon Lords. Quick setup and good gameplay. As somebody mentioned, it could have been a $60 cardboard game. It probably could have been a $30 cardstock game or a $0 print and play. There isn't much to it. You want "not as overly complicated as Dungeon Lords" and Foundations of Rome is definitely not that complicated. I would call Foundations of Rome "borderline simplistic" but keep in mind that I am a horribly jaded gamer who cannot find the fun in anything anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 05:54
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:
The two games are pretty different in playstyle. Arkham Horror LCG is fairly comparable to Arkham/Eldritch Horror the board game as far as general gameplay goes: each scenario generally has investigators run around a map, picking up clues and avoiding enemies, while trying to complete objectives (that usually require cashing in clues to advance) before the doom clock runs out. Marvel Champions doesn't really do maps, just each hero's abstracted zone of control. Gameplay revolves around delaying the villain's evil scheme while punching the villain, with the heroes losing if the villain completes their scheme or defeats all the heroes. The big difference between them gameplay-wise is the overall structure of the game. Arkham Horror generally revolves around scenarios linked together in a campaign, with experience from previous scenarios spent on upgrading your deck for the next one. Defeat in any single scenario is rarely the end, though it does result in accumulated trauma that may eventually result in the permanent end of an investigator (for that campaign). There's rules for playing each scenario standalone, and certain scenarios designed for that which are narratively disconnected from any campaign, but overall planning for the whole campaign and upgrading your deck is a big part of the game, and you'll be missing out on quite a bit if you don't have a regular group of players to advance through a campaign with. Marvel Champions doesn't have much of that, it's generally just 'pick 1-4 heroes, pick a villain and a couple of encounter sets, fight'. There are a few 'campaign's they've released with a set of villains designed to be played one after another, but even then you can play each of those villains standalone without missing much. I personally prefer Arkham Horror's campaign style, but there's no denying that Marvel Champions generally works better if you don't have a regular group and just want to get into a quick game. I didn't really like Marvel Champions deckbuilding though. Each hero deck generally consists of 50% hero-specific cards, 50% neutral cards or cards from one of four classes. If you're into deck customization, there's not a lot of room for that, and all the decks end up feeling really samey. I'd much rather just play Sentinels and have fully preconstructed hero decks rather than a half-assed style like that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 06:40
|
|
|
Quacks is bad because it has a really binary “you are in danger now”/“you can keep drawing with no danger at all”. This is a major problem with the game, because there can be long stretches of a push your luck game where you don’t actually have to push your luck, and this negatively affects the experience. If you had a chance, however small, to bust out much earlier, the game would be a lot better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 07:57
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:I've played The Resistance once, years ago, and Avalon once last month. Maybe it's the groups I've played with cause the game gets a lot of love but my experience is that deception takes a backseat to deduction in it whereas One Night is more deception and Secret Hitler is probably a happy middle. Something's not clicked with my plays, at least when I played Avalon recently the person who sold us on playing it ended by saying "well it's better with more people" which might be true but it didn't generate any excitement for anyone at the table even for them who calls it a fav. We played with five and I think the one from years back was the same, maybe six. That is a tough thing about so-called "social deduction" games is that they can be hard to afford people information in ways that can still inhibit certainty in interesting ways. The undisputed top of the heap for me is Insider. It's basically 20 Questions. One player is the Master, who answers questions such as "Is it bigger than a bread box?" with Yes, No or I Don't Know. The twist is that one player secretly already knows the answer. They are trying to guide the group to the correct answer before time runs out. Then, everyone (including the Master) has a discussion as to who they think was suspiciously close, and eventually vote up who they think it was. It's a modern classic. Any group that likes social deduction owes it to themselves to try this one. Prior to that, our group's go-to social game deduction game was Don't Mess with Cthulhu, known in some markets as Timebomb. It is very simple, which gives chances to drip honeyed words into each others ears and engage in subterfuge. There is some information added to the system, but it's mostly probabilities. "Person X said they had 2 Elder Signs, we checked 2 of their 5 cards and found 0. Were they lying or just unlucky?" This one is pretty good, especially for the dead simple complexity level, though Resistance is probably technically better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 08:09
|
|
|
Curiosity arrived yesterday  It's a coop deckbuilder about surviving in some catacombs.From the game's boardgamegeek page quote:Curiosity is a cat themed cooperative deck-building campaign where players work together to attempt to escape the Catacombs. The game has three modes: Campaign, Arcade, and Trials.       Hoping to try it out soon!!
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 12:02
|
|
|
A bit disappointing hearing that the recent reprint of 1880 has a bunch of misprints and errors. Wonder if they'll send a correction/update kit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 14:18
|
|
|
i lust for the day a print run has “hire a professional technical writer and copy editor” as a goal
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 19:01
|
|
|
PRADA SLUT posted:i lust for the day a print run has “hire a professional technical writer and copy editor” as a goal
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 19:20
|
|
|
Does anyone know what's going on with Lords of Vegas being out of print/the new KIckstarter/new edition? It's pretty much the only game I really wanted to pickup or the rest of the year. Some Strange Flea posted:but what about me, folding and unfolding the nemesis rulebook like a mad magazine fold in I laminated a bunch of player aids, cause that book is an absolute mess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 20:39
|
|
|
I don't want to have to play Monopoly over Christmas 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 20:40
|
|
|
Some Strange Flea posted:but what about me, folding and unfolding the nemesis rulebook like a mad magazine fold in dev save at DC12 or suffer 1d4 papercut
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 20:56
|
|
|
Infinitum posted:I don't want to have to play Monopoly over Christmas I hope you have to play with the “free parking = all the money paid to the game rule” welcome to hell 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 20:59
|
|
|
Infinitum posted:Does anyone know what's going on with Lords of Vegas being out of print/the new KIckstarter/new edition? The real new edition with new art assets is coming soon. http://lonesharkgames.com/vegas/
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 21:23
|
|
|
Played Spirit Island for the first time at a meetup today. Not much to say, it was as good as everyone says. Easily the best coop board game I've ever played, with The Crew and Gloomhaven a fair way behind in second place. I usually strongly dislike coop games, but SI felt more like you were all individually working towards a common goal in your own way, while cooperating where needed, than the usual feeling of every decision being made by commitee.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 22:27
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:In my one trial game of each AH seemed a lot more interesting, but maybe MC picks up after a few games. There's a thread for LCGs if you want more educated opinions (edit: not that the topic is banned here or anything). Inadequately posted:The two games are pretty different in playstyle. Arkham Horror LCG is fairly comparable to Arkham/Eldritch Horror the board game as far as general gameplay goes: each scenario generally has investigators run around a map, picking up clues and avoiding enemies, while trying to complete objectives (that usually require cashing in clues to advance) before the doom clock runs out. Marvel Champions doesn't really do maps, just each hero's abstracted zone of control. Gameplay revolves around delaying the villain's evil scheme while punching the villain, with the heroes losing if the villain completes their scheme or defeats all the heroes. Cheers I'm gonna take this discussion on over to the LCG thread. PRADA SLUT posted:That’s the idea, it’s a game about lollin when other peoples pots blow up, immediately before hitting your 1-in-11-or-wait-was-it-9-poo poo-what’s-in-this-bag-again chance to blow yourself Never put me on edge that I was going to blow up and I never really cared when other people did. The penalty wasn't great enough to matter and for at least one turn in the game you're better off busting on purpose to take victory points or a gem. Needs more punch. Another problem was the tokens are so often duds that drawing doesn't feel exciting, just hopeful and then "ah, okay, well..." Magnetic North posted:That is a tough thing about so-called "social deduction" games is that they can be hard to afford people information in ways that can still inhibit certainty in interesting ways. Not the first time someone's pitched Insider in my direction. Definitely gonna check it out. Not sure the LGS carries it but I'll keep an eye out for a chance to play.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2022 23:21
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:Never put me on edge that I was going to blow up and I never really cared when other people did. The penalty wasn't great enough to matter and for at least one turn in the game you're better off busting on purpose to take victory points or a gem. Needs more punch. Another problem was the tokens are so often duds that drawing doesn't feel exciting, just hopeful and then "ah, okay, well..." I think the experience is better if you edge more before blowing and then bust late.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 02:20
|
|
|
New Spirit Island question: If my son (6, can play Marvel Champions with minimal rules reminders) will be the proud owner of both the core set and Horizons this Christmas, what's the optimal way to on-ramp him? Is Horizons a good teaching set of spirits? Should I use core components? Et cetera.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 04:02
|
|
|
Just dropped into the local junk shop for costume bits and they had a whole wall of clearly-counterfeit games - azul/catan/splendours all for 50% of local RRP. They were in with the usual bunch of clearly off label clones but not even trying to hide the fakeness (pretty sure they've never been in hinge-fold boxes..) - kind of wild that it's so open.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 05:40
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:I've played The Resistance once, years ago, and Avalon once last month. Maybe it's the groups I've played with cause the game gets a lot of love but my experience is that deception takes a backseat to deduction in it whereas One Night is more deception and Secret Hitler is probably a happy middle. Something's not clicked with my plays, at least when I played Avalon recently the person who sold us on playing it ended by saying "well it's better with more people" which might be true but it didn't generate any excitement for anyone at the table even for them who calls it a fav. We played with five and I think the one from years back was the same, maybe six. I never found any deduction in Secret Hitler - if you're a liberal, you have no information, and you get zero concrete info that you can base any decisions on throughout the course of the game unless you get to see someone's role. Were two fascist policies actually drawn, or just one and the person who chose it is a fascist? Impossible to tell. Is the person who saw the other person's role telling the truth, or lying? If they told the truth and the person was a fascist, did they tell the truth because they're liberal or because they're throwing the other person under the bus? Likewise, impossible to tell. And even if you do get to see someone else's role, similarly nobody will ever know if you're telling the truth. Every game I've played has just been a game of arguing (I mean, play arguing obviously, we don't get that heated) about who's lying and who's not lying and no one knows anything except the people who do know something but no one knows if they're lying so it doesn't really matter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 05:56
|
|
|
CitizenKeen posted:New Spirit Island question: If my son (6, can play Marvel Champions with minimal rules reminders) will be the proud owner of both the core set and Horizons this Christmas, what's the optimal way to on-ramp him? Is Horizons a good teaching set of spirits? Should I use core components? Et cetera. Horizons has the same major and minor powers as the base game and has less complex spirits, generally stuff you're not going to be worrying about managing to quite the same degree as some other more complex spirits from the base game. For a 6 year-old, I think horizons will be much easier to comprehend because of the power progression cards. I don't know if those exist in any form for any other spirit island game but horizons has a special card for each spirit that just lists what minor and major powers you'll be picking up and in what order, so instead of doing the draw 4 & pick 1, you just go through the list and pull out the card in question. I can see this being a great way of avoiding overwhelming your kid by basically giving them training wheels until they feel up for picking power cards on their own.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 06:15
|
|
|
Power progression cards for the 4 low complexity spirits are in the base game too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 06:30
|
|
|
Then those are probably fine to transfer over to horizons as well, just as long as you keep track of any repeats between the two games. I imagine there's probably at least 1 card that's on one of the base game progression cards and on one of the 5 horizons progression cards, though if they accounted for that when designing them I'll be impressed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 07:49
|
|
|
Played Bargain Quest yesterday for the first time. Everyone liked the theme and the silliness a lot; deep down we all want to be homicidal fantasy capitalists, I guess. It's a bit more difficult of a teach than you might think, but once you get rolling it's fine. The art is wonderful, the cards are funny and for the most part quite clear and simple. The thematic integration of some cards, such as the Rogue/Rouge stealing from another player's shop to add to their own money is very very good. The randomness of the adventure cards added some drama and humor to things, making it much less deterministic. One actually ended up deciding the game in the final possible combat which was exciting though disappointing to that player, of course. There is a little bit of "Take That" but nothing too major, I thought. We played 5 player, and I can see why it's probably more recommended for 4, since the small amount of downtime does stretch on a bit. Of our players, 3 of who enjoyed it, 1 who didn't appear to enjoy it, and then there's me who is enjoyed it but is still processing if it's "good" or not. I can certainly see why the goon response was medium. First off, we had some pretty serious and unexpected AP for the Display phase, which I can sort of understand since it's a blind bid with a fairly complicated opportunity space. What I didn't get was the serious AP in the Shopping phase. It feels like what you can sell should be fairly straightforward: as much as you can and they will either live or not. Maybe if you have, like 5 things you can sell them you have to work out the combinations, but this isn't exactly Power Grid math. It's 3+2+1 >= 6. Done. Then again, my hands were usually bad with few 'wild' items to pass along, so maybe it's harder than I thought. What was more of a bummer the fact that there doesn't seem to be much in the form of catch-up mechanism. Sure, the monsters we played with punished the leaders, but that only matters if they live long enough to do it more than once or twice. (I believe they don't fire at the end of the Adventure Phase if they're dead, though that could be wrong and other monsters could be different.) Throughout the game, there is an equality of opportunity to get prestige for the most part; wounding and surviving. There are other ways to get prestige here and there, but that's most of it. Also, there is also mostly an equality of money in the system, since most heroes start with about the same amount of purchasing power and all survivors get the same amount from the monster, so the only variance is in rounds where a few survived and a few didn't. This is more pronounced after defeating a monster, but this is literally only twice in the game, and I feel that generally those rounds are likely to have gone well with many survivors if they dispensed enough wounds that round, so it feels more likely to have a homogeneity where only 1 or 2 heroes. Even then, you may not be able to compete for that character at all. In that way it reminds me (in a bad way) of Till Dawn which is basically a bad and more complicated Incan Gold where (to my memory) there is no way to gain additional reward for bailing out early and no change to the rewards for sticking in longer, so everyone basically has the same amount every time. That game is bad and isn't the type of thing I should be thinking of when playing a well-liked game. Based on this, it seems like everyone has about equal opportunity except for their drafted cards, so those draws matter hugely. With only drafting 4 cards with no 'ditched' card like 7 Wonders, you are getting one card that is simply what no one wanted and will likely be very bad, so you're really only getting 2-3 cards you want. This makes it feel like certain upgrades are quite necessary, which is an element also seen in Colosseum. I consider mandatory upgrades to be mostly negative in games by closing out certain avenues or creating perpetual invisible metas that are not clear to beginners, so that's not great. Another downside is I don't think you can generally afford to 'hate draft' when you're only getting 4 cards. You just have to get stuff for yourself if possible, and drawing from such a large deck of cards, the variance can mean it doesn't match the available heroes. Just because everyone's going to get someone doesn't mean they will be especially profitable. This is especially bad if you get a bad clump of cards right as a round turns and the returning heroes have lots of money, because then that all goes right into the thrash, but more on this in a bit. I can certainly see players implementing a house rule to draw 5 instead of 4 and discard the last, though I am typically loath to do something like that. Together, a mix of equal and inequal opportunities make it feel like a "strike while the iron is hot" sort of game, which I normally like. Still, it's kind of bad feels when you realize that if you heck up, you need to hope your opponents hecks up because it does seem likely to catch up if they don't. They can get 2 prestige and 25 money, and maybe you can get 3 pretige and 30 money, but you spent a turn doing nothing so you're still behind my probably around 4 points. (Money is worth 10 per point.) Is someone using some card over and you can't compete? Better hope a Burglar or Hired Thug comes out and you're ahead of them in turn order which is only guaranteed if you picked last. I wonder if it could benefit from a Eclipse expansion-style turn order variant where instead of clockwise, all phases go in reverse draft order, though that would be way too complicated for the target audience. Then again, the guy who almost one was almost always last, so maybe I'm incorrect. But it was sort of bad feels. Also, there is a lot of shuffling of the tiny Adventure deck and the Employee deck, since cards often get shuffled back in instead of put on the bottom or discarded. This is a weird choice, though I see why they wanted to. It makes me want to sleeve it. Despite all these negatives, I should say that it kicks the everloving poo poo out of Boss Monster, which is probably its closest analog. Overall, at this early juncture, I am willing to say this would be a perfectly fine way to get people into hobby board gaming so long as you are an experienced and patient game tutor. Maybe prime them with one or two even simpler games like Love Letter or Just One or Insider if they are completely new. It's pretty simple outside of the draft, with mechanics meshing well with the theme to avoid rules friction. It creates funny, chaotic and potentially memorable situations that will hopefully engender good feelings and memories in the players to get them into board games. At least, for long enough for them to discover their tastes and hopefully become train addicted sickos like the rest of us.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 13:12
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:I never found any deduction in Secret Hitler - if you're a liberal, you have no information, and you get zero concrete info that you can base any decisions on throughout the course of the game unless you get to see someone's role. Were two fascist policies actually drawn, or just one and the person who chose it is a fascist? Impossible to tell. Is the person who saw the other person's role telling the truth, or lying? If they told the truth and the person was a fascist, did they tell the truth because they're liberal or because they're throwing the other person under the bus? Likewise, impossible to tell. I think compared to One Night Werewolf it's more deductive. Elections and yay/nay, chancellor/president, and investigations all add deduction in addition to policies passed. I had an easier time deducting off that information than off of guessing roles in Werewolf. I feel like your ability to deduct is pretty heavily effected by turn order but nonetheless. I will say that the win condition for fascists via electing Hitler chancellor is maybe a bit too easy to accomplish? I would've liked it one policy later. CitizenKeen posted:New Spirit Island question: If my son (6, can play Marvel Champions with minimal rules reminders) will be the proud owner of both the core set and Horizons this Christmas, what's the optimal way to on-ramp him? Is Horizons a good teaching set of spirits? Should I use core components? Et cetera. I agree with what posters said above. I'll add, since they didn't mention it: go with the the invader components from the core set. They are just nicer and remove a lot of token clutter on the board. Easier to see what's going on. Other than that I think the Horizons power cards contain errata'd text so you'll want to stick with those over the core set cards moving forward. Perry Mason Jar fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Oct 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 15:32
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:I've played The Resistance once, years ago, and Avalon once last month. Maybe it's the groups I've played with cause the game gets a lot of love but my experience is that deception takes a backseat to deduction in it whereas One Night is more deception and Secret Hitler is probably a happy middle. Something's not clicked with my plays, at least when I played Avalon recently the person who sold us on playing it ended by saying "well it's better with more people" which might be true but it didn't generate any excitement for anyone at the table even for them who calls it a fav. We played with five and I think the one from years back was the same, maybe six. Yeah, I don't think there's a particularly good config for Avalon at 5 - you really need 7 or 8. You can learn to play with 5, but there's going to be a lot of "blue cruises" where nothing happens, where spies are deductively identified, etc..
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:I never found any deduction in Secret Hitler - if you're a liberal, you have no information, and you get zero concrete info that you can base any decisions on throughout the course of the game unless you get to see someone's role. Were two fascist policies actually drawn, or just one and the person who chose it is a fascist? Impossible to tell. Is the person who saw the other person's role telling the truth, or lying? If they told the truth and the person was a fascist, did they tell the truth because they're liberal or because they're throwing the other person under the bus? Likewise, impossible to tell. I think how it tends to work with these deduction games is that once people get the hang of playing (maybe starting with a simpler game with more information available) is that people start to get good at them, and it starts getting more difficult for the evil team to get by, so the only way to stop that is to reduce the amount of information available. Especially if the information that does get given out has some kind of esoteric statistics to it, which would tend to separate it from the people trying to figure out with psychology and social cues who wouldn't be so math-brained. I think the deduction game I like best is Two Rooms and a Boom though, which really breaks from the standard model in so many ways because it's a symmetric game, so it's never as clear who needs to lie to stay afloat, and people have more latitude to play how they want. Lying may even not be required.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 05:34
|
|
|
ONW def doesn't have more deception than Avalon. The puzzle in that game primary comes from roles than the players, and its easy to end up playing against your win condition the majority of the game because whoops someone swap you. Secret Hitler is inelegant. There is more focus on figuring out allegiances from how people are behaving than roles than ONW, but the deck puzzle feels disconnected and is uninteresting. If I wanted to keep track of card numbers the Cthulhu game is better and simpler and doesn't waste your time as much. Quest is interesting since I think it is closer to ONW and Secret design than Avalon was, with more of a focus on roles and mechanics. I think it succeeds unlike those other two games because like avalon the game still is primary about players rather than mechanics. It also streamlining Avalon with the removal of the voting phase and the evolution of the assassin's phase with blind hunter and good's last chance is just brain feel good design.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 06:04
|
|
|
Got a game day this weekend and gonna try and get Mind MGMT, Hamlet, and Psychic Pizza Deliverers Go To The Ghost Town to the table.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 13:29
|
|
|
Played The Kings Dilemma over the weekend. REALLY enjoyed it. It's great because, you can play it 'seriously' and try and win, you can play it totally in character and try and roleplay, or you can just kinda go along for the story, and you can easily switch between doing all three on the fly, and it's totally fine. It's so chill, but the more you put in the more you get out. I could see it not totally being everyone's bag, but our group really 'got' it, we spun little bits and pieces of our own narratives (based on in game lore) that actually always ended up having hilarious payoffs when the game addressed them. I can't go into details without it being spoilers, but it really felt like just a good time, and we can't wait to get it back to the table. I think it would lend itself well to drinking while you play, which is suuuuuper rare for boardgames (only other one I think it works with is Spartacus), but it did not lend itself to being hungover.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 14:43
|
|
|
Introduced the fam to Dune:Imperium yesterday. Either I'm sicker than I thought or worse at the game than I previously believed, but I trailed my wife and daughter for the whole game. I did manage to pull out a winning five point turn (cashed in intrigue card: 4 spice for 1 VP, got guild alliance, bought a Spice Must Flow, and then won a 2VP conflict with Heighliners -- I had spice stocked up the wazoo and never got a good chance to spend it until that turn) for a 10-8-8 victory but it was a close thing. If I hadn't gone first that turn? I would have lost, I'm sure, as someone else would have grabbed Heighliners, and then I couldn't have hit research station to get the three cards I needed to get seven persuasion points in-hand for a SMF card, plus I would have missed out on the VP from guild alliance. I could have crammed enough warriors in to win the fight from Arrakeen, Carthag, and Stillsuits/Hardy Warriors, as I already had 4-5 in my garrison and they both had none going into the round, but I might have lost to an intrigue card in that case (I think one of them had one that gave them some bonus swords in the battle). Daughter declared she loved it; wife was studiously neutral on it as she is on all new games. I can't believe I never put it together but is Heighliners a play on Heinlein's name?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 15:09
|
|
|
My group is preparing to play Aeon's End Legacy so to prepare I pulled out War Eternal to see if an extended break with fresh eyes makes winning any more possible. Verdict: Barely. Even with the lowest difficulty nemesis on beginner difficulty two of us barely edged out a win. The nemesis got 4 turns in a row twice, something I consider extremely rude and almost cost us the game. Something about forming a coherent strategy with this game is beyond me still though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 16:53
|
|
|
Decided that the new spirit reveal from the KS needed something extra:
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 16:54
|
|
|
SettingSun posted:My group is preparing to play Aeon's End Legacy so to prepare I pulled out War Eternal to see if an extended break with fresh eyes makes winning any more possible. Verdict: Barely. Even with the lowest difficulty nemesis on beginner difficulty two of us barely edged out a win. The nemesis got 4 turns in a row twice, something I consider extremely rude and almost cost us the game. Something about forming a coherent strategy with this game is beyond me still though. It's a game that greatly rewards efficiency. I've gotten better with more plays and can pretty consistently beat the easiest few baddies now, but every once in a while a run of bad luck will still tank things.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 17:00
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Decided that the new spirit reveal from the KS needed something extra: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 17:22
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 17:24
|
|
|
SettingSun posted:My group is preparing to play Aeon's End Legacy so to prepare I pulled out War Eternal to see if an extended break with fresh eyes makes winning any more possible. Verdict: Barely. Even with the lowest difficulty nemesis on beginner difficulty two of us barely edged out a win. The nemesis got 4 turns in a row twice, something I consider extremely rude and almost cost us the game. Something about forming a coherent strategy with this game is beyond me still though. There’s a nice house-rule variant that can eliminate the chance of four enemy turns in a row with affecting the balance too much: Patience: When a player’s turn order card is revealed, they may choose to delay their turn. Draw the next turn order card, then place the player’s turn order card back on top of the deck. With this rule if you get three or four player cards in a row at the beginning of a round you can choose to delay some of them so the nemesis doesn’t get two turns in a row at the end of the round (with subsequent possible four nemesis turns in a row). If it starts feeling too powerful you can cap it at two or one total player relays per round, and/or add a life cost (player or Gravehold). That said, Legacy does a pretty good job of layering mechanics and allowing you to build market synergies. There are a couple of places where the Legacy mechanic and bad luck can make the rest of the campaign significantly harder, though!
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 18:53
|
|
|
SettingSun posted:My group is preparing to play Aeon's End Legacy so to prepare I pulled out War Eternal to see if an extended break with fresh eyes makes winning any more possible. Verdict: Barely. Even with the lowest difficulty nemesis on beginner difficulty two of us barely edged out a win. The nemesis got 4 turns in a row twice, something I consider extremely rude and almost cost us the game. Something about forming a coherent strategy with this game is beyond me still though. "Buy fewer gems, buy spells sooner" is what I usually recommend. Buying a few cheap spells round 1/2 makes a huge difference.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 14:42 |
|
|
Also simple things like discarding gems together for a big buy on a future turn can make a big difference.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 20:08
|
|