|
I know there's a lot of subjective opinions about 18xxs, but is there a site that has a decent table of things like # of players, general complexity, additional stock shenanigans allowed, nonstandard rules, etc.? I'd like to know more but wouldn't know where to begin, and I'm not crawling through individual pages on BGG or whatever.
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 19:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 08:37 |
|
|
Well this interests me. Wasn't there some controvery about Ace of Aces? I'm probably thinking about a different kickstarter campaign of a game though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 19:07
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Well this interests me. Isn't this just the old Lost Worlds-type, "32" "16" "I turn to page 19. Take 2 body; do no orange or red next turn" type two book combat? How are they doing it with only two books in the Kickstarter? Different planes get different datasheets (e.g., different damage modifiers for maneuvers, different HP totals)?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 19:15
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:I'm not sure if there's really any consistent bloc of 18xx players. Ask a dozen people to rank their favorite five, and some of the lists will match exactly, and some of them will have zero overlap. 18MS was a surprise hit for a few games with us (mostly 3p but one or two 4p as well) but we have cooled off on it because I think that A) there's not a ton there and B) each time, without fail, whoever made it to New Orleans first ended up winning. Not decisively necessarily, but it happened. But there is something to be said for the locked in rounds/rusting events that I think might work in other designs... The first track lays can also be a trap for a game that is supposed to be beginner friendly because if you build out but lack the extra tile lay private or forget to use it and someone else gets there first I think it's GG for you. I have been trying desperately to get Old Prince onto the "table" but the initial auction is so alien that we have all agreed that we need to do it live and with the assistance of a friend who knows how it works but lives in Australia versus EST. I would prefer to play 67 over 22 any day, simply because 67 would take about half as long. Admiralty Flag posted:I know there's a lot of subjective opinions about 18xxs, but is there a site that has a decent table of things like # of players, general complexity, additional stock shenanigans allowed, nonstandard rules, etc.? I'd like to know more but wouldn't know where to begin, and I'm not crawling through individual pages on BGG or whatever. There are some extremely groggy lists like this: http://www.fwtwr.com/18xx/rules_difference_list/ but unsure if that answers your question or not. Otherwise it's just scumming BGG. The 18xx.games wiki is pretty good but again, don't think that's what you're looking for. FulsomFrank fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Feb 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 19:36
|
|
|
I'm not familiar with Lost Worlds but Ace of Aces is a very old book, and I think this is just a new vesion of it. I think there are only two planes, one per book, and the stats of the planes are represented by how successful some manuevers are versus others. The classic books had different duels (Fokker Triplane vs Sopwith Camel etc): you can't really mix and match because airplane movement has a lot more effect/momentum that similar systems on the ground.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 19:36
|
|
|
1830 is obviously historically significant and is a useful foundation for learning other games but I think sometimes its eccentricities/specifics get treated as a default or ideal approach for the genre.FulsomFrank posted:The more I play the more I think 1849 might be the best of the bunch overall. And Clearclaw seems obsessed with it and 1860 but I don't really understand 1860 as much beyond recognising there are some interesting things in there for sure. 41 feels like a contender for my favourite but I'd need to actually finish a game to tell. 28 seems to rely on you intuiting what Clearclaw designed the game to be about. 73 (Harzbahn ) was something I liked a lot more than I expected. I still need to play 22 or one of its variants. Doctor Spaceman fucked around with this message at 01:48 on Feb 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 21:05
|
|
|
SelenicMartian posted:The Magic Realm of 18xx, Railways of the Lost Atlas, is coming eventually to annoy both camps. I've only played 1889 so far, but I have this on order as well. I haven't played nearly enough 18xx to know what I would like more or less about the different games.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 21:34
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Well this interests me. I was on that Kickstarter and I remember there being a huge gap in communication, and I thought it would never fulfill, but when it finally did, it looked great. Don't ask me if I've played it. Shut up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 01:40
|
|
|
SelenicMartian posted:The Magic Realm of 18xx, Railways of the Lost Atlas, is coming eventually to annoy both camps. Honestly, after having gotten a play of my copy of Shikoku 1889 in a couple months ago as my first game in the 18xx series, I'm kind of excited about Railways of the Lost Atlas? A lot of that excitement stems from the fact that its mechanics are a vast contrast to the stylings of 1889, whilst also still being promoted as an entry-level game. When I was looking up other games in the series for what kinds of mechanical twists and variations they have, I was drawn to 1817 and 18USA for the mechanics of having companies 'grow up' from 2-share to 5-share then 10-share, and that you can 'build your own' company through the attachment of private companies. In 18USA, there's also randomization of elements like the high-value destinations and the private companies to add more variety. On the other hand, there are also shorting and loan mechanics that add complexity to the game, and their overall weight seems to be very high for the 18xx space. So on face value, it feels like Lost Atlas is kind of in the sweet spot for me in terms of 18xx mechanics I want to try playing with. I have reservations about the auction mechanic for starting new companies, but I really like how they have inherently unique properties. I'd been considering other commonly-suggested (relatively) low-overhead 18xx games like 1846 and 1861/67 to fit between Lost Atlas and 1889, but I don't know if they'd differentiate themselves enough from those other two games. It's also probably better to not overload the 18xx section of my collection without actually giving Lost Atlas a try and getting multiple plays of Shikoku 1889 in to build my general experience. (Though if there's one 18xx game that I have my eye on getting "just because", it might be 21Moon? The theme and variable setup is intriguing to me, though letting companies own shares in each other gives me a big question mark on how to approach the mechanic. I think that's a good thing, probably?)
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 02:45
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:1830 is obviously historically significant and is a useful foundation for learning other games but I think sometimes its eccentricities/specifics get treated as a default or ideal approach for the genre. Sell me on 41. It looks SCARY.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 14:34
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:Sell me on 41. It looks SCARY. It's scary
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 15:08
|
|
|
41 has probably one of the fastest train rushes of any 18xx because: a) 5s rust 3s, b) 5s aren't permanent, and c) you're lucky if any given non-permanent train runs once/more than once (3s and 5s in particular can sometimes rust before they ever get to run). On the other hand, companies being able to start other companies and issue shares to the market means that company capital increases at a near exponential rate... until you run out of companies or starting locations anyways. On top of all that, you have to maneuver through several historical national border changes and a couple of forced company mergers. It's also not actually that long once you start getting used to shell companies, you're often into the permanents by like, the 4th OR set. It's a crazy game and I always enjoy playing it, it's extremely funny watching your value for 90% of the game be lower than the cash you started the game with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 15:40
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:It's scary taser rates posted:41 has probably one of the fastest train rushes of any 18xx because: Okay, this is interesting. And look at that, .games has it in beta now! Just perused BGG for listings and the prices on this are hilarious. Luckily some enterprising individual is selling a copy on ebay for... half a grand + shipping. FulsomFrank fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Feb 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 16:06
|
|
|
I've not played 1841 but have read the rulebook, and among its many oddnesses is the ability for players to buy shares from other players directly for any mutually-agreed price. And there's a little bit in the annex saying "OK, you don't have to do that".
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 16:17
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:Okay, this is interesting. And look at that, .games has it in beta now! I'm guessing that's a copy of the original Lawson edition, you can order a new copy for significantly less from GSG though there's a queue of a few months. It is a big game since there are 16 companies so it's always going to be on the pricier side.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 18:07
|
|
|
taser rates posted:I'm guessing that's a copy of the original Lawson edition, you can order a new copy for significantly less from GSG though there's a queue of a few months. It is a big game since there are 16 companies so it's always going to be on the pricier side. Yeah saw that and they want $175 USD. Brutal. That said, it appears that these guys (https://www.alephgamestudio.com/en/home/) are doing a reprint and according to one guy on BGG, they're sorting out details with the designer? Here's hoping.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 18:17
|
|
|
I've not ordered anything from them, but I've seen a few complaints about Aleph's production quality and design decisions. Warped components, and people proxying tokens that didn't make it to the punch sheet. They also seem to move pretty glacial.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 21:12
|
|
|
Yea, I believe they said they were doing that reprint years ago and there's basically been no word of it since, so who knows.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 22:43
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:Sell me on 41. It looks SCARY. So you start a company at 140. It's incremental cap so 420 covers your tokens and first train. Then once the 3Ts drop your company sells its shares into the market and starts a child company at 300. Then that child company sells its shares into the market for 1500 in total, starting its own child company at 300 and buying out your now terrible train from your first company. You end up with a huge amount of capital to play with no downsides whatsoever other than having weak control over everything, massive potential liabilities, and the fact that everyone else is doing the same thing and that amount of money burns through trains fast. Doctor Spaceman fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Feb 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2024 22:50
|
|
|
What is the thread's take on Pax Renaissance as it is now in alpha on BGA? I really liked Pax Pamir from Cole, but my understanding is that it plays pretty differently than that game. Is it solid or worth checking out given that it's apparently a tough teach?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 00:59
|
|
|
Carillon posted:What is the thread's take on Pax Renaissance as it is now in alpha on BGA? I really liked Pax Pamir from Cole, but my understanding is that it plays pretty differently than that game. Is it solid or worth checking out given that it's apparently a tough teach? It's a tough teach and is very, very good so, ymmv? You have to internalize things, or else you'll be checking player aids constantly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 01:51
|
|
|
Carillon posted:What is the thread's take on Pax Renaissance as it is now in alpha on BGA? I really liked Pax Pamir from Cole, but my understanding is that it plays pretty differently than that game. Is it solid or worth checking out given that it's apparently a tough teach? It's a similar concept but with a poo poo-ton more levers to pull and play with. So I wouldn't say it plays very differently. But yeah the first teach is pretty rough, best you try it out like 3 handed first to get a hang of all the different possible actions each card provides to you as they are more dramatic than the actions in Pamir. The other major difference is the 4 win conditions vs Pamir's score track - but you'll all still be constantly looking out to see who is likely to score them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 07:32
|
|
|
I'm honestly kind of shocked that Phil Eklund isn't some luddite who would never let his games be played online. I am also unsure of what I feel about the game being on BGA, since it means you can play without paying directly but I don't know of how any financial relations work for this service or if it might be a backdoor advertisement for buying an actual game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 10:36
|
|
|
Anyone shop with nobleknight? Looking to finally get some out of print poo poo and they’ve got most of them listed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 10:55
|
|
|
Carillon posted:What is the thread's take on Pax Renaissance as it is now in alpha on BGA? I really liked Pax Pamir from Cole, but my understanding is that it plays pretty differently than that game. Is it solid or worth checking out given that it's apparently a tough teach? I'm having a blunder through it on BGA just now. Feels like Pax Pamir but really complicated. Maybe I'll read the rules. The best new thing on BGA just now is Maricabo which feels great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 11:01
|
|
|
RandolphCarter posted:Anyone shop with nobleknight? Looking to finally get some out of print poo poo and they’ve got most of them listed. I have never shopped from them, but I have sold them some of my stuff, and had zero complaints. (This was all pre-2020.) Also, they voluntarily recognized their worker's union, which was cool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 11:15
|
|
|
Magnetic North posted:I'm honestly kind of shocked that Phil Eklund isn't some luddite who would never let his games be played online. I am also unsure of what I feel about the game being on BGA, since it means you can play without paying directly but I don't know of how any financial relations work for this service or if it might be a backdoor advertisement for buying an actual game. I would guess BGA pays a licensing fee to the publisher for the rights to use the game on their site. They probably keep an eye on if people play it to decide if they should give Ion and Ecklund more money in the future. For anyone who's wondering why Mag would have qualms about supporting an Ecklund endeavour, it's becauise Ecklund's a vocal libertarian with many opinions on a great number of subjects, such as the immorality of vaccine mandates and lockdowns, how taxation is real slavery, the positive impact of the British empire, the essential backwardness of Islam, the myth of man-made climate change, and so on and so forth. My opinion on the game itself is that it's a lot of fun. Not an elegant game at all but it's got a lot of charm and is pretty approachable. It's got a lot of rules overhead (6 flavours of war) but the game-state is relatively readable and stable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 12:01
|
|
|
RandolphCarter posted:Anyone shop with nobleknight? Looking to finally get some out of print poo poo and they’ve got most of them listed. Other than that it seems fine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 13:07
|
|
|
Magnetic North posted:I have never shopped from them, but I have sold them some of my stuff, and had zero complaints. (This was all pre-2020.) Also, they voluntarily recognized their worker's union, which was cool. SelenicMartian posted:Out of 8 orders, I had two games that were listed as unpunched but certainly had been. For one they gave me a partial refund. The other had tokens inserted back into the sheets, one token missing, somehow had an extra token that could only have come from a different copy, plus a token from a different game. Thanks. Gonna try it out next payday.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 13:09
|
|
|
Yeah Noble Knight has about as solid a reputation as a used game company could have. I've never had a bad interaction with them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 14:03
|
|
|
Pax Ren is like nearly every Eklund game I've ever played (except maybe Bios: Origins): "rule-book the game". I am not kidding when I say that I participated a 3P teaching game with someone who likes it and has played it a few times and knows how it works and by the end of the 2+ hours I felt like I still had no loving clue what I was doing. Total confusion. Still shellshocked about what's more confusing, this or High Frontier.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 15:37
|
|
|
My favourite story about Pax Ren's rulebook is that a card had an action it couldn't ever execute. The action was "move pirates around", but you could only move pirates from one sea-having edge of the target card to another. Well, the card in question only had 1 boarder with any sea. The living rules changed the action to let pirates be moved onto adjacent cards as well. Really gives you an idea of what a forest of chrome he cultivates. And I stand by my saying that Pax Ren is one of his more comprehensable efforts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 16:07
|
|
|
i'm trying to place workers but the board is dummy imp'd
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 17:23
|
|
|
To take it back to train chat for a moment, after doing some research on BGG and Google, it seems like 1846 might actually be a better starting game than 1889 due to, among other things, speed of the game and not having a floating-wrecker like the ferry in the companies. 1889 wins for slickness of components, though, I'm sure. Thoughts? Or to put it another way, what do people find to be the best starting 18xx? My target
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 17:52
|
|
|
Admiralty Flag posted:it seems like 1846 might actually be a better starting game than 1889 due to, among other things, speed of the game and not having a floating-wrecker like the ferry in the companies. The GMT / Lehmann one? I am no 18XXpert but I think I recall that one is divisive. It was mostly recommended because it was actually available, unlike many many other games before Grand Trunk and All Aboard came around. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, of course.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 18:12
|
|
|
89 is the better intro game and the better game all around.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 18:18
|
|
|
Admiralty Flag posted:To take it back to train chat for a moment, after doing some research on BGG and Google, it seems like 1846 might actually be a better starting game than 1889 due to, among other things, speed of the game and not having a floating-wrecker like the ferry in the companies. 1889 wins for slickness of components, though, I'm sure. Thoughts? 1846 is not my favourite game in the world but I'll happily play it over nothing. 46's problems for me are that it's kinda bloodless. It's mostly about running companies well and you live and die on the routes/tokening being done. This may appeal to some people but to me it isn't really exciting and can drag on. The pros are that it isn't mean really unless people get sad about being locked out of Chicago or whatever, so they should be generally pretty happy throughout assuming they enjoy a euro with stocks and tracks. It's also mostly very simple and like you're saying, it's a good learning game, it's just that the skills you learn in it don't necessarily translate 1:1 to other, better (IN MY OPINION) 18xx's. 1889 is a lovely game, GTG did a tremendous job on the reprint, and perfectly fine for teaching (skip the intro game, waste of time) and it's usually a toss-up between that and MEX for me if I were to drop a game on new people to teach them. That said, because 89 is basically 1830 in Japan, it can be very mean with the double-sided sword (katana?) that it can just as easily stall with infinite 3s as it can with a bankruptcy depending on player count. You can't go wrong with trying both 89 and 46 with your friends and seeing what they like. I know my group had this wide-eyed reaction to 46 that I wasn't expecting, very positive. I just don't think it's really any faster than 30 variants. Your victims are experienced players, you should try 1849 and see what they think of it because it's a threaded needle between the two and quite a fascinating game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 18:19
|
|
|
The biggest issue with 1846 is that it needs experienced, aggressive play from multiple players to be a nice briskly paced introduction, otherwise it takes an incredibly long time. 1846 is a good teaching game if you are teaching new players one at a time, and everyone else has played atleast 5-10 games of 1846. If you are teaching everyone from scratch, 1889 is a much better learning experience as it will be shorter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2024 23:21
|
|
|
Admiralty Flag posted:To take it back to train chat for a moment, after doing some research on BGG and Google, it seems like 1846 might actually be a better starting game than 1889 due to, among other things, speed of the game and not having a floating-wrecker like the ferry in the companies. 1889 wins for slickness of components, though, I'm sure. Thoughts? I think it's useful as a way to dip your toe into the more operational side of the genre. Some of the things you learn won't really transfer over to 30 and friends but the same is true in reverse. For a while it had the advantage of being one of the easier 18xx games to find in person but the combination of AAG and GTG's releases and .games has meant the value of that aspect has dropped a little.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2024 00:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 08:37 |
|
|
No 46 is a run train good game, and is a different type of train game with horizontal stock and such. Chesapeake I think is still the best but 89 is fine also. I have found some beginners find 89 overwhelming because the number of private companies where as ches its like "blocks this, blocks this, blocks this, 10% share of this company, 20% of this" and doesnt introduce too many concepts where as 89 is a bit more varied which is good, but harder for new players.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2024 00:08
|
|
