|
Some pics, all fun games but it's unlikely I'll have a chance to play 1853 (other people didn't like it) or 1830 (it's too broken we feel): I still really like 1853 because the board develops up nicely and it leads to interesting end-states, but it does feel like the game is a foregone conclusion after the start is decided. I think it works better with 4 rather than 5:  Another good game of 1824, 3P: I think this is one is fast becoming one of my favourite 18XX.  1830: we had a huge poison 4 stall. It seems the game is either that or simply a race to bankruptcy. Not an enjoyable game. 
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 22:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:53 |
|
|
The group I play with refuses to play 1830 because whoever gets stuck into a forced D-Train purchase is certain to finish in last place. The couple of times I have played it, there seems to be a lot of tension over the early game that just kinda fizzles out in the mid game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 12:53
|
|
|
1830 is pretty much a russian roulette where the only important thing is operating order. I think it can be fun if you are all newbies but otherwise the game just degenerates down to relatively boring scenarios.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 13:36
|
|
|
We have played 1830 over a 100 times and never found these things to be the case but groups are different.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 13:45
|
|
|
It probably is due to how different groups approach the game. It's one of the things I like about 18XX, but 1830 really doesn't seem to work well for our group: 18MEX seems to work much better and brings a similar feeling to 1830 without having to worry about buying 4s that aren't even going to run once.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 13:56
|
|
|
If only I could obtain a copy of 18MEX. Deep Thought Games seems to have died and no one has stepped up to replace them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 14:58
|
|
|
I don't think Deep Thought is completely dead, just that its production has slowed to a crawl. I am currently 401 in line, which is down from something like 450 at the start of the year. I think the guy runs off runs of games for conventions, and that is part of the delay.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 15:55
|
|
|
Orvin posted:The group I play with refuses to play 1830 because whoever gets stuck into a forced D-Train purchase is certain to finish in last place. The couple of times I have played it, there seems to be a lot of tension over the early game that just kinda fizzles out in the mid game. Don't be that guy. Just go bankrupt first (not too hard to do if people are still starting companies).
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 17:01
|
|
|
I'm not a huge fan of games ending due to bankruptcy, IMO it should be something that happens rarely if ever and only if someone has made a bad mistake, not just through regular, standard play of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 17:17
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I'm not a huge fan of games ending due to bankruptcy, IMO it should be something that happens rarely if ever and only if someone has made a bad mistake, not just through regular, standard play of the game. Well I have to say in our games it is only if someone makes a mistake. Naturally the mistake is generally made when 3’s and 4’s are still in the game, it just awhile for the mistake to become obvious. That said, we rarely have bankruptcies anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
I played 18NY after being really tired after a long day of work and I've never been so bored in a game of 18XX, it was unreal. It's a partial cap game with 50/50 minors (which don't actually need a train and convert into even money when they fold in to form the NYC), loans and is extremely money rich, meaning that I didn't feel any tension at all in the game and didn't have to worry about how I was going to get trains at any point in the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2013 13:04
|
|
|
That's good to know about 18NY. It looked like it had a little bit of potential. Was the game long or short? I might still be willing to pick it up if it plays quickly. I played the prototype 18PA a couple weeks ago at a local train games con. I don't think it was money rich, but it definitely wasn't money poor. The minor companies vary wildly between incredibly good, to just okay. You really need to make sure to pick a couple up though, as they eventually turn into a permanent 2-T that doesn't take up a train space. The designer is still tweaking the rules, so I will try to keep an eye on development. The one thing I did like about it is that it was fast. A 4 player (3 good players who never played before) game took only 4 hours, and that is includes the 30-45 minutes of rules.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 17:17
|
|
|
A dilemma from a recent game of 1889 I've been playing - I'd be interested in seeing what other people would do (I've made my move already, so it's fairly academic!). It's a 3P game at the start of SR4. I'm Yellow (names blanked out) and I've just started the SR. The map is:  And the stock market is:  What would you do?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 13:28
|
|
|
That is a tough one. You really want to break the 4-Trains, but you can't really do it on your own with just a single new company. Selling shares hurts because that will give your opponents something to do with the cash they have laying around. Given all that, I would still probably sell 2 shares of each company that you hold, and start the SR at $90. Maybe sell an extra share and start at $100, but I have trouble making that call at times. Then you need to get Kotohira upgraded and a token dropped. How many of the 3-Trains you buy is dependent on what your opponents do in the SR. If no other companies start, probably buy two 3-Trains (I haven't played many 1830 based games, so I have a hard time figuring out which trains to buy). You will need the extra revenue the second train brings in, and it makes it that much more likely that the 4-Trains will come out after the next SR. If other companies are started, you may only need to buy a single 3-Train if you think you will be in a position to break the 4-Trains in the following OR.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 14:04
|
|
|
!889 is 50% float and max cap is 100 right? You shouldn't need to drop more than two shares per company to float at 100 if it is. I would, in your position, drop below 20% on both companies: although the risk of one getting dumped on you isn't that much of a problem, two companies getting dumped on you will likely mean that two new companies start and then you are completely stuck. I agree with Orvin that you want to speed up the rush: the more you wait, the more the others make money so you really want to get to the four as early as possible, although that does largely depend on which companies get started this SR. EDIT: I played 1844 and against expectations I rather enjoyed it. It was a long 3P game but I had a lot of fun even though I hosed up the start and became dead last. Pics forthcoming.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 14:41
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:EDIT: I played 1844 and against expectations I rather enjoyed it. It was a long 3P game but I had a lot of fun even though I hosed up the start and became dead last. Pics forthcoming. At LoB? Skimming through the thread, I've realized we've played together - it's strange experience staring at pictures from the C2C game on page 2 and realizing that I was looking at a pile of my stuff. For what it's worth, I was the one who came last and I didn't give a poo poo about the game - I knew I was out of the running a good six hours before the game ended!
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 15:49
|
|
|
Yep, it's at LoB. I think I remember you as well. I started in Texas in that C2C game, it didn't end well. The world is a small place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 19:28
|
|
|
I got to play 1856 yesterday. It's loan/Canada Government mechanic is pretty cool, and there are a lot of neat stock tricks going on in that one. It's more complicated than 1830 unfortunately, but I think it definitely is a better game. One person who has slightly more experience in these games was having a strong (not necessarily dominant) lead, which almost soured one player to it. Unfortunately the game got cut short due to unexpected time constraint, but drat if I didn't enjoy it. I really wish need to get a spreadsheet program and some better bookkeeping tricks. That's the hardest part to deal with in these 18XX games for me. Also, playing 18XX games makes me really wonder if there are ways to design a game that captures the important parts of 18XX and focus on the really awesome parts. Something with less tedious bookkeeping but really strong economic play with a way to drive that economy using a very visual element, preferably with some thematic/historical element. To my knowledge nothing like this really exists, but point being 18XX really excites me design-wise.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
Over the weekend there was a boardgame convention that was close to me and had a bunch of train gamers there. I got to play 18NY which is still in the testing phase, and liked it. It is a partial cap game with H trains (endgame is an 5E train and Dieslels). The twist is that most of the small cities, large cities (that don't have majors or minors starting in them) and off board locations have a +10 token on them. The first company to run to that location picks up the token and puts it on the charter. For current and all future runs, a company adds +10 to the total run (+1 per share for majors). You lose any tokens a company has accrued if the company is ever trainless. The tokens rewarded building odd stubs of track to places that would be ignored in most games, and that was kinda cool. What was kinda annoying was that small cities upgraded like in 18Nebraska (I think). You replace a yellow small city with a yellow large city. It made upgrading through some sections of the track a pain as it takes extra builds to get through the small cities. The game does need some more tweaks I think, as even with the tokens, the entire northwest section of the map was ignored. It had lots of mountains, and since nothing started there, just the tokens were not enough of an incentive to spend the extra money building up there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
Rails released a new version (finally) with support for 1880! We should try to get a game going to celebrate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
Trynant posted:Also, playing 18XX games makes me really wonder if there are ways to design a game that captures the important parts of 18XX and focus on the really awesome parts. Something with less tedious bookkeeping but really strong economic play with a way to drive that economy using a very visual element, preferably with some thematic/historical element. To my knowledge nothing like this really exists, but point being 18XX really excites me design-wise. Can you elaborate on what aspects of 18XX that excite you are not available in other designs?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 16:03
|
|
|
Paper Mac posted:Can you elaborate on what aspects of 18XX that excite you are not available in other designs? I rarely see games of 18XX's scale, historical theme, and complexity/depth that don't involve direct confrontation. Phil Eklund's stuff and Splotter designs (although Splotter's less historical) are about the closest I've seen (Splotter's designers also happen to be big fans of the 18XX games!). I mean, I've already stated that I like the strong, economic play of these games. Manipulating dynamic stock-market that is driven by a very visual element (the railroads giving you a great idea of how certain companies and their stocks will be doing) is a huge part of play, but also the way that there is a lot of depth going into these games that a lot of euros fail to reach is a big sell. In short, I dig how 18XX presents the depth and scope of a war game but from a completely different angle than the direct confrontation. Not many games do this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2013 03:17
|
|
|
Trynant posted:In short, I dig how 18XX presents the depth and scope of a war game but from a completely different angle than the direct confrontation. Not many games do this. That's a really interesting point. I've yet to play an 18xx game, but one of the things that's attracted me is the detail that you rarely find outside of wargames. I'm interested in Splotter games as well, although they seem to be even more difficult to find than the 18XX series.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2013 05:43
|
|
|
I've been wondering if an 18xx game could fill the Titan-shaped hole in my life (the player elimination coupled with long gameplay makes it very hard to convince people to play Titan these days). I've been looking at 1846 (it seems to be a simpler game, and I trust Tom Lehmann a bit for Race for the Galaxy), but I'd have to order it from Deep Thought and I can't even really know if I'd like it. Is it at all feasible to try and learn the game over the internet using Rails, or do you really need to know it before using Rails? edit: 1846 itself isn't on Rails, but the question still applies to other 18xx. Also, does the 7-11 month lead time posted on Deep Thought's page seem accurate? Incidentally, when starting a conversation about 18XX it is possible the other person will think you are talking about '18+ XXX' which leads to confusion. rchandra fucked around with this message at 08:29 on Nov 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 07:48
|
|
|
I think there is a chance that you could pick up 18xx games by reading the rules, and tinkering with rails. But that would probably lead to some misinterpretation of the rules. The best way would be to find a convention or just a group in the area and watch or play a game. If that isn't an option, ask lots of questions here. Rails automates a lot of stuff that you need to know when playing a physical game. As for Deep Thought games, I am currently 398 in line after submitting an order over a year and a half ago. When I first submitted the order, I think I was mid 500s. So I wouldn't count on that happening any time soon. While it is a much more cutthroat game, you should be able to find a copy of the 1830 reprint that was released a year or two ago. It has the core mechanics that most of the future games are based off of. So it can be a viable alternative to pick up and learn the rules.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 14:58
|
|
|
1846 is actually how I got started in the genre: it's very lenient and it's what I call a 'two-train game', because you are almost guaranteed to be able to get at least one end train during the course of the game and the actual aim of the game is to be able to get two and run two good routes. If you can find it I would recommend it, but putting an order on DTG will take you forever. The secondary market would be your best bet but it's rare to find stuff there. What area are you in? If you are UK I might be able to give you a try of 46 with my group.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 15:52
|
|
|
Orvin posted:As for Deep Thought games, I am currently 398 in line after submitting an order over a year and a half ago. When I first submitted the order, I think I was mid 500s. So I wouldn't count on that happening any time soon. Tekopo posted:What area are you in? If you are UK I might be able to give you a try of 46 with my group.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
I am not sure if this would work for you, but Amazon currently has 7 copies of 1830 that are sold and fulfilled by Amazon. Might see if they are available to you and if their price is competitive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 20:39
|
|
|
Orvin posted:I am not sure if this would work for you, but Amazon currently has 7 copies of 1830 that are sold and fulfilled by Amazon. Might see if they are available to you and if their price is competitive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
1835 is a pretty big game and is more complex than 1830, just keep that in mind.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
1853 arrived today. I took a quick leaf through the rules, now I just need to arrange a game and figure out how it plays. Probably best to start with the short game rules (remove the £500 bills), and possibly find a way to skip the initial bidding since nobody will know much? I expect I can grab 3-4 people once or twice, and see if we like it, but having everybody read the rules ahead of time is unlikely. The board is giant, 2 4-page folded pieces that merge, and that's without even including the Seven Sister states! Apparently the reissue simplified the game and board. For some reason I had pictured the 18xx hexes as being much smaller - this is good for my eyes and hands. On a first glance, I'm not sure of the difference between the two types of track gauge - the rulebook mentions solid and dashed lines, but the tiles all have images of track. The money looks nice but doesn't feel nice, and I think counting or separating a pile will be tricky. It's a pity game companies generally don't make realistic currency (to be fair, the new Canadian plastic bill series has that problem too). I do have poker chips as an alternative.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 08:42
|
|
|
I take it you don't have the Mayfair edition of the game?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 08:49
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I take it you don't have the Mayfair edition of the game? I have the Mayfair/Lookout edition from 2009. I've figured out which track is which, there's an example which names one of them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 22:55
|
|
|
So I played 1862 today and managed to win on my first game! It was surprisingly better than I thought it would be, but the game overall is kind of fiddly, but somehow works. Much better than 1860 and it is something that I can see myself playing again and again. The game is very weird, though. There are three different kind of trains and they all run in different ways! As well as that, only 8 companies come out at the start, 4 in the green phase and 4 in the brown phase, while 4 do not come out at all. All these companies are dealt randomly so all the games are going to be wildly different. As well as that, companies are randomly assigned a type of train permit and although they can buy any type of train, they can only run the type of train they have a permit for. So some companies might run really well with one type of train might run really badly with another: this really adds to the replay-ability since you really need to be able to judge what company is gonna be good with each different type of trains. The only way to have a company be able to run different type of trains is if they merge with another company. Merges are done very simply: you add half the value of the higher share price with the whole value of the lower share price: potentially the share price can decrease. Merging transfers over train permits, extra station tokens and money, but you have to trade in shares 2 for 1. If you only have one, you can either sell it for half the value or buy it by paying half the value. Companies can be opened in one of two ways: either during a 'Parliamentary' round, in which people can select companies for auction and then people auction for the ability to open it (presidency shares are 30% which you need to pay at a par price you decide on top of that). If you win the auction, you pay your bid, then you pay 3 x the par value and you can immediately buy up to 50% to float immediately if you have the money, getting full capitalization. If you don't have the money you keep the presidency, the company doesn't run and you have to buy the remaining 20% in stock rounds: if you don't float in the next stock round, however, you pay a penalty AND LOSE THE PRESIDENCY. The other way to start companies is to buy the presidency during the stock round. In that case, the company starts as a partial capitalization company instead. Crazy game. You can sell down to 0% owned as well, so no danger of getting companies dumped on you. As well as that, you can 're-capitalize' which means you lose half of your share but get 100% of the money based on cap again: this is crazy good (although I didn't do it and still managed to win). You can only 're-capitalize' if you need to emergency train buy. So, what about those trains. Well, the three different ones are: - Express: they ignore small towns and just run as a standard train but can run to the off-boards. - Local: they scoop up small towns for +20 each, but cannot run offboard. As well as that, they gain +10 to the company for every hex they go through. - Freight: They only count the start and end cities, can run off-board and gain +20 for all intervening hexes (or +30 if one of your starting hexes is a port). They are also Hex trains. All trains cost the same and there is a standard distribution of trains, as a train can be bought as one of three different types. Trains of different types can use the same track, BUT there is a crucial problem, which is based on the crazy rules you have to use to actually run trains in this game. First of all, all your trains have to connect to each other. Even if you have tokens in two separate parts of the board, they still need to form one single network (by sharing at least one cities). So train A could be sharing a city with train B which is itself is sharing a city with train C (and A and C don't have to share a city). As well as that, you need to run your home station with at least one train. The weirdest rule, however, is that you can only count a city once per OR, no matter how many trains you ran out of it, no matter what type of train it is! So let's say you run a freight and a local out of a particular city where you have a token: you would only count that city once. This, of course, means that while local and express trains don't particularly want to share track (since they would only count the cities once anyway), freight trains are great because they get 30 per intervening hex and don't actually count the towns (although freight trains become less good when good cities are in the middle of their routes. Once the last type of train is bought, the game ends after finishing the ORs, having a stock round and then running 3 ORs without the position of the board changing at all (no placing tiles/tokens/merging/buying new companies) although you can still buy trains from the bank. The board is very cramped but because companies will merge, it isn't actually that bad (as well as that, if the slots in the home city of a company are already taken, that company can't start at all, there is no reserving slots for companies). Overall, I really enjoyed it and I can't wait to play it again, but it truly is one of the weirdest 18XX games I've ever played. I would still recommend it though, just because it is so different. One note though, as I've said, the production qualities of the game are really bad. The board didn't fold neatly, the share certificates felt cheap, the map is as cluttered as 1860 and the paper money that the game comes with is an absolute joke. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2013 20:09
|
|
|
I got to try 1853 today. As Tekopo warned it was indeed long, we didn't even finish the short game in around 8 hours, give or take a food break. Hopefully we will get faster - everybody did enjoy the game anyway. I was playing with, say, Rabbit and Kangaroo. I started by bidding £103 to connect Allahbad and Lucknow with Delhi and Lahore. Kangaroo bid £100 for Delhi, Lahore, and two cities on the northern frontier, and Rabbit bid £90 on four cities in the far south including Madras. In the first stock round I held on to some useless shares as well as one in #3 and didn't get to start my company (#2, Great Indian Peninsula) until the second round when I rearranged them. Fortunately Kangaroo was building north from Delhi with #3 (North Western) so I was able to recover my bond quickly. I built some long and twisty routes near Delhi and Allahbad, trying to collect a lot of small stations with the 2-trains. I also built metre gauge south-east from the Bombay base, once we reached phase 2. Rabbit was connecting everything in the south with his metre trains (#7, South Indian) and Kangaroo had some nice routes in his territory, eventually extending an arm south and trying to merge it with my supply of small stations. As we gained money, we were feeling the desire to advance the game and get more trains / better upgrades but didn't seem to be able to - quite possibly playing something wrong there. So Rabbit managed to start his other starting company, the #6 (Madras & South Maratta) and continued to develop the south, both companies seemed to be very nicely using each others' track and willing to promote stations to make space. Kangaroo and I ended up very heavily invested in each others' companies (60-40), as well as having some skirmishes with track laying/promoting (we learned proper rules for promoting partway through, I think), and a while later I started the #1 (East Indian) but with the holdings 40-40-20 I wasn't entirely sure how I wanted it to develop, and sometimes used it to buy trains from the #2 (once underpaying, once overpaying to smuggle funds) and thus free up a train slot. At this point we were feeling a bit tired and decided to call the game rather than play on or save state, so that we could try again in the future, possibly with more people. I finished with total value £4050 in cash and stock, Rabbit £3973, and Kangaroo £2634. It seemed like Kangaroo was going to be taking more advantage of development near Delhi, as well as starting the #5 Bombay/Baroda/Central India next turn, probably taking the lead. I was ready to start the #8 East Coast Railway and work on connecting Waltair to both #1 and #2-south. Rabbit's future plans involved the #4 Bengal Nagpur. Cellphone picture of the final board state:  Now, some questions that came up in gameplay: The Elephant token passes to the left of the player who was last to buy. Is this last to actually purchase a share or last to have a chance to purchase a share? What if nobody buy anything that stock round? Our elephant didn't seem to move much. Assuming a tile is placed at a valid Railhead, do its connections to adjacent tiles have to make sense (both its track not leading to a dead-end, and adjacent tracks matching up with it)? Looking at the board from Tekopo's game, as well as the situation around Calcutta, I think they do not. Similarly, can you promote a tile such that it has new track going to tiles showing no track on that side? Can a company can promote any tile within its area (assuming you are not in phase 5), not needing a rail connection to that tile? This would make sense to avoid being able to block off starting bases before the company gets to deal with it, but seems a bit weird to be able to put large stations in the middle of somebody's route. Can you ever throw away trains or buy more trains than your limit, in order to throw some away? 4.8.5 seems to prevent this, so we weren't sure how to advance past phase 3 with all the companies being full of trains - and then started to try to make more companies to hold more trains. Is it normal to be fully invested in each others' companies? There seemed to be no reason not to, particularly with the rule that the Bid companies need to be fully issued before people can buy the other ones. All 5 operating railroads had 100% of shares in play. Thanks for your patience, I'll figure out how this works eventually!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 05:22
|
|
|
It's last to actually purchase a share. Most 18XX have this rule and it always makes it better for the person next to the person that buys loads of shares. Remember you can sell the elephant as well if you want in 1853. Yes, you can lay tiles/upgrade even if the new track doesn't actually go anywhere. I think there are some limitations in 1853 that I can't remember out of hand (one of them is that you can't have two gray city upgrades next to each other) but for the most, you can lay however you want. You can lay a track so that it points towards a tile where it has no track on that side. The limitation is that you cannot build track if it would connect to the outside of the board (ie the sea/border). Remember that when building, major companies can build two tracks but they can only build from different railheads (ie station tokens) and when tracing the path from the railhead, you cannot share track with another railhead. It's a weird rule only really present in 1853. You have to have a connection to somewhere (that isn't blocked) in order to upgrade a tile. Remember also that in Phase 5 you can only upgrade outside your area if you have the appropriate train. What do you mean by blocking off? If you mean tokening, then there are rules that prevent you from tokening the home city of a company: if you mean just using rails to block off a starting city, then nope, there are no rules to prevent that. You can't throw away trains, unfortunately, or buy over the limit. Once you reach the limit, you are stuck there and will need to start new companies. Remember that it is possible to pay for a train out of hand in 1853, even if you aren't doing emergency train buying. In 1853, it's normal to invest in other's, especially since you can only hold 60% of a company. You usually want to go to 60% yourself in a company in order to make sure that what you are doing isn't actually helping others as much as yourself. Let me know if you have any other questions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 10:20
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:You have to have a connection to somewhere (that isn't blocked) in order to upgrade a tile. Yeah, we were wondering about doing something like playing track next to Calcutta's south entrance so company 4 is stuck there. They wouldn't be able to upgrade since they can't reach the offending tile. But what we missed was in 4.2.2: "A tile which is not at present connected to a Company Base may only be promoted when this establishes a connection without a break of gauge", so they can upgrade that tile - once out of phase 2, anyway. And fortunately everything you can legally place there has upgrades  .So if nobody buys a stock in a stock round, the elephant would just stay where it is. But what if I was entitled to the elephant one round, sell it, and then nobody buys stock next time? Do I get it back (left of the last buyer) or does it not move without a stock purchase?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
If everyone passes in a stock purchase without buying anything, the elephant remains where it is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
Played another game of '24, it's pretty much one of my favourites at the moment, well worth the price I paid for it. We all tried different strategies this time and I would have raked in the cash but a smart token placement by another player completely blocked me and I pretty much came last because of it. I especially like the fact that although at first some strategies seem overwhelmingly more powerful, if you have more experience more and more paths are opened and the game really opens up. I can't wait to play it again. As well as that, I am eagerly awaiting for April, when I will get my copy of 18OE and also get to play it at a convention. My group is also planning for a weekend of 18XX at another convention, can't wait for that either. Has anyone here tried 1858 (Iberia)? It really interests me due to the location but I'm heard that it isn't all that good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2014 11:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:53 |
|
|
Tekopo posted:Played another game of '24, it's pretty much one of my favourites at the moment, well worth the price I paid for it. We all tried different strategies this time and I would have raked in the cash but a smart token placement by another player completely blocked me and I pretty much came last because of it. I especially like the fact that although at first some strategies seem overwhelmingly more powerful, if you have more experience more and more paths are opened and the game really opens up. I can't wait to play it again. Someone in my gaming circle just placed an order for Iberia and the other new game from All Aboard Games (1873). I am not sure when they are expected in though. I don't know all that much about it, but I can't imagine that it will remove 1817 or 1862 from being the most popular at our group right now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2014 12:18
|
|