|
Rutibex posted:Why the hate for occupation cards? They are typically nigh-useless and randomly assigned, what's not to hate?
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:21 |
|
|
T-Bone posted:nothing is really up to date but my ratings so that'll work Hahaha all those Tekopo threads from two or three years ago
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:Hahaha all those Tekopo threads from two or three years ago
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:26
|
|
|
Indolent Bastard posted:Relatively easy. You just need to get your head around how booking the platform works and how know what customers are coming up works. Friend of ours we started a 3p game night every so often with her coming over and...specifically playing games we never get to the table but want to play more. Played Princes of Florence, Dungeon Petz, Tzolkin, a bunch of Feast (got obsessed with it), Aquasphere, etc. Basically trying to hit exactly that space you described.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:26
|
|
|
Indolent Bastard posted:I find that Dungeon Petz exists in an annoying liminal space. Serious gamers seem to want the cult of the new, or something more grindy and thoughtful, or a game that is less "silly", and neophyte gamers are daunted by the seeming complexity of it. Well hey I might have to pick this up, since I think my regular gaming group exists solely in that space sometimes. Collectively we can never make it through anything approaching a wargame, and as for grindy and thoughtful, well, one of our regulars actively resents any game that's fairly deterministic. Plus we all are or were connected to the hot mess that is the game industry at some point so nobody jumps on the cult of the new train, thankfully.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:30
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:Hahaha all those Tekopo threads from two or three years ago Jedit's profile banner "I HATE VLADAA" 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Oh wow, 167 members!? Lot of lurkers or people that just aren’t around these days? I’d say that’s probably easier to use with the caveat that ratings may be skewed to personal systems instead of universal meanings, but with that sample size it probably works out the fluff. I guess everyone just join this instead? You can still add me, I have 0 BGG buddies Yeah I don't think you can organize it like you can with the geekbuddy ratings though. Like, you can view the guild collection and aggregate ratings through: https://boardgamegeek.com/guild/collection/2133?own=1 -- but I don't see a way to organize it to create like say a top 100 for instance. You can filter by game though: 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:If everyone with a BGG account (and game ratings) would either post their profile or add mine I’d like to use the buddy rank system to form an SA top 100. We could also sort it by all of the typical attributes: genre, mechanics, player count, designer, etc. This would also require that everyone generally follow the actual meaning of the numbers by BGG descriptions otherwise the ratings are skewed or meaningless. Added.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:35
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:If everyone with a BGG account (and game ratings) would either post their profile or add mine I’d like to use the buddy rank system to form an SA top 100. We could also sort it by all of the typical attributes: genre, mechanics, player count, designer, etc. This would also require that everyone generally follow the actual meaning of the numbers by BGG descriptions otherwise the ratings are skewed or meaningless. https://boardgamegeek.com/user/neal999 Added you. I'll get around to rating some games. e. where do I find the actual meaning of the numbers? Is this that "Outstanding will always enjoy playing" stuff? CommonShore fucked around with this message at 19:44 on May 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:39
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:If everyone with a BGG account (and game ratings) would either post their profile or add mine I’d like to use the buddy rank system to form an SA top 100. We could also sort it by all of the typical attributes: genre, mechanics, player count, designer, etc. This would also require that everyone generally follow the actual meaning of the numbers by BGG descriptions otherwise the ratings are skewed or meaningless. Also added you, I don't feel like joining a dead guild. Same name as here.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:Yeah I don't think you can organize it like you can with the geekbuddy ratings though. Like, you can view the guild collection and aggregate ratings through: https://boardgamegeek.com/guild/collection/2133?own=1 -- but I don't see a way to organize it to create like say a top 100 for instance. You can filter by game though: Yeah you're right, so I'm going through and manually adding every member there (and linked here) then I can do the geekbuddy ratings list.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
I'm not a huge fan of Dungeon Petz at 3P because I'm so used to the 4P game and that's what I mostly try to play. However, playing 3P Petz is alright and less of a chore than playing 3P Dungeon Lords, which I would never ever do due to the fact that I hate playing with the bot. I tend to agree that Petz is a really weird place in terms of appeal: it's too cutesy and potentially random for heavy euro gamers, but it's way too complex and finicky for lighter players. On the other hand, in my circle of friends it has had a lot of success because most of the people I play nowadays find both the complexity and the theme appealing, and I've taught rules for the game so many times that I basically got it down to a fine art, including making jokes and stressing the important parts of the game (which is essentially the pets and how you score with them). The teaching pattern for me is: -explain how the pets work and run a few trial pet need draws to show people how they work -stress the difference between the colour of the cards, and the actual need that needs to be fulfilled (people seem to get really confused about this for some reason) -stress that needs are important and basically are 100% of how your score is calculated. -start from the beginning and go through the first phases (and also set up the initial items as an explanation) -do a mock auction/grouping phase and explain who goes first etc -explain every single space (although the exhibition and platform is saved for later) -go through how exhibitions and buyers work -explain the last two exhibitions I think as long as you inject some of the humour of the game while teaching, the game can be a lot more palatable to people, and I always get comments like "there was a lot to learn when you said the rules, but the game was really simple once we actually got started". Which, to be frank, is true, because the turn-to-turn (especially in the first few turns) is really simple. One of my favourite things about teaching Petz is that it inserts the players into the game slowly: you start with 1 (or no) pets in the first turn, and no auction, which means that you just need to worry about the needs of the pet you have. During the second turn, you usually have one or two pets, and need to actually worry about the cards you are playing for the first exhibition. By the time the game reaches the third turn, newbies already had two turns to learn the mechanisms of the game, and the game now opens up with the addition of buyers, and the REAL game begins. It's really good game design that the game introduces mechanisms in this slow, gradual way.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:If everyone with a BGG account (and game ratings) would either post their profile or add mine I’d like to use the buddy rank system to form an SA top 100. We could also sort it by all of the typical attributes: genre, mechanics, player count, designer, etc. This would also require that everyone generally follow the actual meaning of the numbers by BGG descriptions otherwise the ratings are skewed or meaningless. You just listen to this week's So Very Wrong About Games too, eh? https://boardgamegeek.com/user/PlaneGuy
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:51
|
|
|
Also I added you Bottom Liner so add me if you haven’t already
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:nothing is really up to date but my ratings so that'll work I just checked the SA guild thing, looking for the 'join' button, but it's actually 'leave' for me. Guess I joined a long time ago and forgot about it. Here's me, I need to update a few games I've gotten recently, but otherwise I keep up to date on what I own and how I rate them: https://boardgamegeek.com/user/Ravendas
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
I don't use my BGG account that often, and I need to update my games and ratings. https://boardgamegeek.com/user/OmegaGoo
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:If everyone with a BGG account (and game ratings) would either post their profile or add mine I’d like to use the buddy rank system to form an SA top 100. We could also sort it by all of the typical attributes: genre, mechanics, player count, designer, etc. This would also require that everyone generally follow the actual meaning of the numbers by BGG descriptions otherwise the ratings are skewed or meaningless. Might need to update mine, but let's have at it. https://boardgamegeek.com/user/enigmahfc
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
Got everyone that added/posted/messaged me and is in the guild so here's the prelim results. Parameters were minimum of 5 votes which felt like a fair number for the group size. There's a lot of expansion stuff so I'll just post the top 150 so people can get a general idea of the game's popularity. Unfortunately my ratings aren't accounted for with this method which would have directly effected a lot of games near the top (Tash-Kalar, Mage Knight, Kemet, and Keyflower would all move up). Overall though, this is a great list and objectively better than BGG's overall rankings.  Goon Top 100+ code:I'll post the updated list periodically if things change around much. They might change a lot if this gets people rating more or adjusting previous ratings, but this is a good start. Bottom Liner fucked around with this message at 20:33 on May 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
holy crap I've not played all of those by any means but I think I would play every single one of those games. MTG included. Objectively better indeed!
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:22
|
|
|
What the hell is Kanban? Also, isn't Falling Sky pretty new?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:If everyone with a BGG account (and game ratings) would either post their profile or add mine I’d like to use the buddy rank system to form an SA top 100. We could also sort it by all of the typical attributes: genre, mechanics, player count, designer, etc. This would also require that everyone generally follow the actual meaning of the numbers by BGG descriptions otherwise the ratings are skewed or meaningless. Just made a pass to regrade a bunch of stuff and feel pretty decent about my current rankings. https://boardgamegeek.com/user/Huxley734
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
and for fun, the worst games according to goons (reverse order)code:
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
I don't think I like Dominion's Envoy promo card more than Puerto Rico but wow, yes, there is nothing on that top list I would refuse to play. Well done indeed.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:29
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:What the hell is Kanban? It's a lacerda game and very highly recommended by everyone who I've heard play it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
This is giving me some new options on my next acquisition. I might end up just getting A Feast for Odin regardless.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:33
|
|
|
Android so bad that not even enough people are there to review it
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:35
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Android so bad that not even enough people are there to review it Never played it, never will, but I don't think that's enough to actually rate it. There's definitely some on that list I should rate a 1 instead of not rating, though...
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:36
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Android so bad that not even enough people are there to review it Oh man, I remember *trying* that game. It was bad. And not fun.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:37
|
|
|
I'm surprised enough people have played Napoleon's Triumph, even within a small list of this thread's members, to register it a top ten ranking.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:39
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Android so bad that not even enough people are there to review it Geekbuddy rating: 6.14 12 ratings I would 100% play that dumpster fire at any time. Probably only once, but still.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:39
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Dead of Winter and Time Stories getting appropriately dunked I'm all for Time Stories being trashed by anybody and everybody, but am I the only human on the planet that actually kind of likes Dead of Winter? e: originally I typoed the title as "Dead of Winger" and now I want a board game about fighting the undying corpses of 80's hair metal band members silvergoose posted:Never played it, never will, but I don't think that's enough to actually rate it. So I'm not sure if this is what you're saying at all, but it's always baffled me how the unwashed masses of BGG feel very entitled to rate games they have not ever played or (even more baffling) games that have not been physically demoed anywhere. It cracks me up when a friend of mine tells me a game his company has just announced already has either a 9 or 2 rating on BGG depending on how rabid the fanbase is.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Geekbuddy rating: 6.14 12 ratings
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:43
|
|
|
MockingQuantum posted:I'm all for Time Stories being trashed by anybody and everybody, but am I the only human on the planet that actually kind of likes Dead of Winter?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Honestly what the gently caress people. Who’s played that and thought “this deserves more than a 5”. Considering one of hose rating is my rating of 1 A friend of mine unironically calls it his favorite game he never actually plays, though I think he gets it to the table once every year and half or so, just to remind himself why it shouldn't be played frequently. I think the theme and setting really heavily appeal to some people, but the actual execution is like the ur-example of FFG shoving waaaay too much poo poo into a game because at the time it came out I think CTP still felt games needed a bunch of tokens and minis and cards to appeal to their "core market". Hell, we've got a copy (still in shrink, though).
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
MockingQuantum posted:A friend of mine unironically calls it his favorite game he never actually plays, though I think he gets it to the table once every year and half or so, just to remind himself why it shouldn't be played frequently. I think the theme and setting really heavily appeal to some people, but the actual execution is like the ur-example of FFG shoving waaaay too much poo poo into a game because at the time it came out I think CTP still felt games needed a bunch of tokens and minis and cards to appeal to their "core market". I have played like two hours of Android and don't think I ever knew how to win.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I’m the opposite and I only rate games that I own or have previously owned. I think I started it because I just used to add stuff to my collection and didn’t really want to add anything that I didn’t own. I'm very much this way too. I don't ever feel comfortable rating a game that I haven't played multiple times. Though I've rated a good handful of games that my friends own, it's only ever games that I feel like I have a really solid handle on.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
Where does Falling Sky sit on the COIN complexity/fun chart? Also, here's my BGG but I need to go through and actually rate the games: https://boardgamegeek.com/user/SigmundS MockingQuantum posted:I'm very much this way too. I don't ever feel comfortable rating a game that I haven't played multiple times. Though I've rated a good handful of games that my friends own, it's only ever games that I feel like I have a really solid handle on. Same here. Doesn't feel fair to rate something unless you've given it a fair shake unless it's one of those games that right away you know there are issues. FulsomFrank fucked around with this message at 20:51 on May 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
MockingQuantum posted:I'm all for Time Stories being trashed by anybody and everybody, but am I the only human on the planet that actually kind of likes Dead of Winter? I'm saying two things: 1. I haven't played android and therefore won't rate it, but don't plan on ever playing it 2. I have played a number of games on the bad list that I have neglected to rate a 1
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
Anniversary posted:I have played like two hours of Android and don't think I ever knew how to win. My friend who "loves" it started to explain the rules to us once, and the mantra was "there's a really simple mechanic buried in here, I swear!"
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:21 |
|
|
silvergoose posted:I'm saying two things: Yeah, that's what I figured, I didn't mean to imply you were one of the people I was talking about, it was just what made me think of it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:50
|
|