|
I'm currently playing a 7-player game of Love Letter using two decks shuffled together  It works pretty well actually!
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 01:27 |
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:I've just played Castles of Burgundy for the first time, and I'm feeling a little disappointed by this game that a bunch of people seem to be talking up. Part of the problem with a four player game is that all of the tiles will come out. I'd play a two player game (where it's best), and base your thoughts on that. You aren't wrong about it being an action economy as you put it, but when you can't count on something coming out with any certainty, the game feels more interesting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
It gets shorter once everyone's played a few times, and/or you have a lot of AP people. 2 player it takes well under an hour, and 4 player I'd say more like 90 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:It gets shorter once everyone's played a few times, and/or you have a lot of AP people. 2 player it takes well under an hour, and 4 player I'd say more like 90 minutes. We were playing it for the first time, and we were chatting a lot as well. I'm sure that it could be pretty fast with a more dedicated or experienced group, but it still felt a lot like going through the motions instead of making actual strategic decisions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
It's not a super deep game. Strategy rarely runs beyond changing turn order to get all the cows. Building towards tech for end game vp will almost always pay off nicely as well. Either way these are overt strategies, kinda piled on top of each other. This game gets recommended a lot because it's a shallower game. It plays pretty nice between two, which is also a plus. It sounds like you'd be more interested in some heavier euros. Would you like to know more?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
Is it redundant to get San Juan if you have RFTG?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
It seems like you were perhaps playing too nice? Castles of Burgundy introduces people to the concept of passive aggression in games by making all of the goals fairly easy to attain, but also including a number of different tiles that players have to compete for in order to get. Many of those tiles allow you to get more actions than would otherwise be possible (chapels, markets, castles, mines.) There's the relationship between the use of boats to get first player and the superior action-granting tiles that can be missed by people in the first go-round. Also, the use of the different playmats that come with Castles of Burgundy can change your strategy, and basically let you try out different strategies for victory by making certain types of tiles more accessible in different stages of the game. That said, it is a beginner Euro, and if you aren't feeling particularly challenged by the choices that is by design. The game is supposed to be won narrowly - there aren't any points in the game where you will be forced into a super difficult decision. Something like Agricola, Caverna, or Caylus might be more the game you're looking for if you find yourself unchallenged by CoB. Impermanent fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Dec 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
John Dough posted:I'm currently playing a 7-player game of Love Letter using two decks shuffled together Has anyone drawn both Princesses yet?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
Sometimes it just comes down to people liking different things for different reasons. The Mathematical Elegance tribe and Storytelling tribe will differ in their favorite "Storytelling Game" and some outsider won't find either particularly fun no matter what, but that's life  And regarding Zombie game chat from a little while ago, a game that is sort of halfway between an old-school wargame and a zombie game (ok, more old-school wargame but still) is the board game version of Dawn of the Dead. It's worth a look if you're interested in zombie board games, it does some interesting things and can even be played solo. You have to print it out yourself though because it's been out of print since like 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
Whats everyone thinking on the Memoir 44 expansions (really a question aimed at who owns them, or a handful of them). I'm definitely looking to expand later (for this 10 year old game) and was thinking of the best way to go about it. Right now I think the strongest openers after the base game scenarios are Terrain pack into the Equipment pack, then dole out any of the army specific packs as wanted (since a lot of them seem to ask for the terrain pack) Also Castles of Burgundy does great in terms of being a light euro that you can teach people that aren't too keen on longer sit down games as it gets them to the side of liking euros while still getting to handle dice. I'm willing to wager the reason a 4 player starter game could be boring was that you all used the recommended starter boards that give you all a fair chance to build on any part of the map with a single neat farm, and more or less each sector neatly together so you can build anything at any time. It would have been better to save that map for a small tutorial with another player, then move onto using advanced maps and competing with new players using starter maps, and kicking them up to harder maps immediately. The game can be competitive with 2 players on the base board but over that the market is just so vast you really need the advanced maps so you can suss out what people want from the market and what you can take from them. In general it is lauded for being a very good game, but I wouldn't say it is terribly exciting, but personally I'd rather "go through the motions" of a very competent game, than anything that many people would refer to as "mostly fun" that has big faults and unbalances just because. My group has a terrible habit of drinking some beer/cider and then we have to shelve everything I brought in favor of playing (hopefully) X-wing, which is fine, or they want to bring out loving aggravation or some other poo poo family game. Suspension being the best of them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
Syka posted:Has anyone drawn both Princesses yet? If you play the two-deck variant, you take out one Princess. There's still two Kings and no Queen, though, so evidently this is a most progressive kingdom.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
PROTOSTORM!!! posted:Whats everyone thinking on the Memoir 44 expansions (really a question aimed at who owns them, or a handful of them). I'm definitely looking to expand later (for this 10 year old game) and was thinking of the best way to go about it. Right now I think the strongest openers after the base game scenarios are Terrain pack into the Equipment pack, then dole out any of the army specific packs as wanted (since a lot of them seem to ask for the terrain pack) 8-people Overlord is where it's all at.  That only leaves the tiiiiiny issue that you essentially need two of everything and that the stars will never align in such a way as to bring the entire game to the (very large) table.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Elysium posted:Is it redundant to get San Juan if you have RFTG? Yes. Once you know Race for the Galaxy, the only use for San Juan is to use it as a teaching tool for getting new people into Race. They're very similar, play in the same amount of time and Race is simply a far, far better game that manages to boost the complexity and actually shrink the play time. I do mean that it makes for a good teaching tool in all seriousness though. Not everyone would want to sit down and learn RFTG but San Juan is approachable and simplified. One or two games of that and even board game newbies can figure out Race.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
Has Kemet replaced Chaos in the Old World as the OP recommended war game then?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
I've been playing stuff like Agricola and Terra Mystica for years, I guess I was surprised that such a highly-regarded game didn't seem to have more going on strategy-wise. At least Castles of Burgundy will be easier to get to the table than those other ones, which tend to sit around unopened for years 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Jedit posted:If you play the two-deck variant, you take out one Princess. There's still two Kings and no Queen, though, so evidently this is a most progressive kingdom. It's the Spartan Diarchy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spartan_Constitution#Dual_Kingship
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
KingKapalone posted:Has Kemet replaced Chaos in the Old World as the OP recommended war game then? Not necessarily. Both games have their merits, especially since Chaos has a much stronger Area Control focus on it and really, only one maybe two of the factions should be building any sort of combat unit. It is also inherently a lot more asymmetrical as well in that each of the god will play uniquely differently, whereas the powers from Kemet, whilst mostly exclusive, are in a shared market. However, Chaos also has the limitation of being strictly 4 player, while Kemet scales a lot better. Some people are put off by the theme of Chaos, as well. Both are really good games.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Viticulture, as you said, is really interesting in the multiple ways to win, without having the insane point salad of some games (not saying I dislike Feld, but it's a welcome change!) There are six possible ways to get points in Viticulture. Wake-up track, fill wine orders, sell grapes with the bonus, build a windmill and plant vines, build a tasting room and give tours, get visitor cards that give you points. But everything scores immediately; there's no end-game scoring, or very little with expansions. That makes it seem less like a point salad. That and the unified theme, I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
We played Betrayal at House on the Hill last night. It was scenario 7, and my wife ended up being the traitor. She got kind of butthurt because we just about beat her in two turns, so I'm trying to figure out if there are some details to this. However, I will spoiler it: Scenario 7 was the one with the carnivorous plants. She was excited to play this as the traitor since we do keep some carnivorous plants. She was one of the little girls, since we didn't have the priest in our group, and the fallback went to her due to a dominant stat. The heroes did not know the plants could not move up/down stairs, nor did we know what the traitor's motives were. We had a kitchen on the ground floor from which we could make the chemicals. I had the item (book with instructions on the bug spray) that triggered the haunt, might surpassing 8, and knowledge of 5. Two of us were in the basement and one was in the upper. So we sent our upper-floor person into the mystic elevator and crashed down into the basement--it was a zero roll, but it worked out. We piled into the elevator, and hoped for the ground floor so we could get to the kitchen, but we wound up at the upper level. I believe here my wife as the traitor actually moved towards us, which I considered to be the only part of the scenario over which she had much control and should have done something different. This is because on our turn after that, we just stormed out of the elevator and turned her little girl character into a red streak across the floor. The first melee was a roll of 9 might versus 6, and then I rolled 9 might versus 3. The traitor dying ended any chance of her explicitly winning the scenario according to the traitor's tome. At best we could all just died and triggered a draw. My wife was frustrated because she knew she had to take our item and throw it away to win absolutely, but we pressed that it was a suitable victory if we all died. In the previous scenarios, the traitor didn't have to live for the traitor to succeed. So she kept playing with the plants, but we managed to mix up the spray. It looked like from the rules that we could do the "Walk of Jesus." with the spray. It wasn't an attack action to use it; merely walking into a room with a plant tip while having the spray would kill that plant. So immediately after mixing the spray, I walked through three rooms and took out something like 6 plants--far more than the 4 we needed for victory. What we didn't know on our side, and what my wife did not play well, was that apparently the plants could grab on to us and drag us into the roots, which would cause us to be devoured. So I was thinking if she had positioned them so that they were just out of reach on our turn, she could have caught some of us and dragged us away, but I dunno.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
That's pretty much peak Betrayal in a nutshell. It's extremely hit or miss in delivering a thematic experience it promises. Don't play it expecting a balanced or fair fight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
As someone who played and enjoyed Betrayal once, but can see the huge potential it has for being swingy and causing all kinds of random unenjoyable nonsense, what are some good games that deliver the same kind of experience without as many of those issues?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Hyper Crab Tank posted:As someone who played and enjoyed Betrayal once, but can see the huge potential it has for being swingy and causing all kinds of random unenjoyable nonsense, what are some good games that deliver the same kind of experience without as many of those issues? There isn't really anything that delivers a directly comparable experience, much less does so while being good. I think the design mandate for Betrayal pretty much forces some lovely game design to be possible at all. The closest thing I've run into would probably be Mansions of Madness. I actually like Mansions, which I can't say for Betrayal, but Mansions has plenty of its own issues.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
Yeah pretty much. Random thematic experience generator runs counter to balanced, strategic, and deep mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 23:28
|
|
|
It's so hard to pick the next game to buy. I really have no criteria to make the final decision on but I think I've narrowed it down to Chaos in the Old World, Kemet, Agricola, or 7 Wonders.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
electrigger posted:Mind writing up a bit about why you think its good? I'm on the fence about diving into this one and i've watched videos of it but it seems like it could potentially be rather shallow, I don't want to end up with a lemon. It's really, really outstanding. You've got a lot of the depth of a miniatures game without all the empty calories. Everything you need for reference is right there. You still need to be able to guesstimate if you're gonna get whacked or if it's the enemy who'll have to suffer the first hit. Races all play very differently and there doesn't seem to be (at least inasmuch as our group played it) any obviously overpowered or unfun ways to build your force. It works really great as a 1v1, and since it plays (and army builds!) a lot faster than a miniatures game, you can usually play a game, come up with an idea for a new force, grab an entirely different bunch of units and play another game that won't be anything like the first. I'm really hoping for some more expansions, because it's the bomb, and you don't need much to get a lot of people to have fun with it. I've posted about our mini-tournament in the last thread, you've probably seen it, because I literally can't shut up about it. We ran it for eight people with just two core sets and one box of each of the expansions, and with a tiny bit of proxying (and most people just doing their own thing, so very few armies were doubled) it worked.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
KingKapalone posted:It's so hard to pick the next game to buy. I really have no criteria to make the final decision on but I think I've narrowed it down to Chaos in the Old World, Kemet, Agricola, or 7 Wonders. I really like 7 wonders. Get that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
PROTOSTORM!!! posted:Whats everyone thinking on the Memoir 44 expansions (really a question aimed at who owns them, or a handful of them). I'm definitely looking to expand later (for this 10 year old game) and was thinking of the best way to go about it. Right now I think the strongest openers after the base game scenarios are Terrain pack into the Equipment pack, then dole out any of the army specific packs as wanted (since a lot of them seem to ask for the terrain pack) You really want at least one or two of the army packs (probably all three) first, they come with a lot more bang for your buck than the terrain pack. It's not really accurate to say that a lot of the army pack stuff requires the terrain pack, the Eastern Front for example has 8 scenarios, only one of them calls for the terrain pack. The terrain pack comes with only four scenarios, and the equipment pack has probably the heaviest dependance on other expansions of the bunch, it requires the terrain pack to a much higher degree than any of the army packs, as well as having scenarios that require the Winter Wars pack, and many scenarios that require the army packs. I'd start with whatever Theater/Front pack appeals the most to you, then add one of the others, then get either the third one or get the Terrain Pack if you want to make your own scenarios or download scenarios from the website. After that, MAYBE look into the equipment pack. Scyther fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Dec 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Cocks Cable posted:Yeah pretty much. Random thematic experience generator runs counter to balanced, strategic, and deep mechanics. There are a few solo wargames that I feel are successful marriage of both - namely Fields of Fire and the [Whatever] Leader series. Basically, their trick is quite a bit of random in generation of obstacles + making the player care about the cardboard dudes under their command by various means (strengthtening stories you make up in your head) + actual non-poo poo mechanics of managing the mess in front of you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
What's with the big concentration of 4x games in the OP? Any particular reason you discuss these at some length while not really talking much about other game archetypes? Are they particularly popular with goons at the minute or something? I find my groups never really want to touch em, sadly. Funso Banjo fucked around with this message at 00:04 on Dec 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
Rocko Bonaparte posted:We played Betrayal at House on the Hill last night. It was scenario 7, and my wife ended up being the traitor. She got kind of butthurt because we just about beat her in two turns, so I'm trying to figure out if there are some details to this. However, I will spoiler it: The last time we played we had this exact scenario and it ended diffrently It came down to a dice rolling match as the last good guy was repeatedly getting dragged away then immediately freeing herself while the traitor pinked away at her with a gun Yeah as much as i love playing Betrayal it's not exactly the best in terms of actual game design, but then again i'm ALSO a fan of Mansions of Madness so maybe i just like lots of little tokens and pieces and huge boards over "good" gameplay experiences Speaking of expansions, does Pandemic:In the Lab assume you bought the other expansions? The rules talked about On the Brink and the Bioterriost alot. Is it possible to play it without those 2 other expansions then?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
Funso Banjo posted:What's with the big concentration of 4x games in the OP?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
HOOLY BOOLY posted:Speaking of expansions, does Pandemic:In the Lab assume you bought the other expansions? The rules talked about On the Brink and the Bioterriost alot. Is it possible to play it without those 2 other expansions then? Yes you can play without them; On the Brink just has 3 optional things you can add, one being the bioterrorist. Amoeba102 fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Dec 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
KingKapalone posted:It's so hard to pick the next game to buy. I really have no criteria to make the final decision on but I think I've narrowed it down to Chaos in the Old World, Kemet, Agricola, or 7 Wonders. 7 wonders is a bad game. The cool thing is that you can play it with up to 7 players; unfortunately, it's best with 3-4, and is too random at 5+. And if you're going to play with 3-4, there are hundreds of better games. Kemet is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
Malloreon posted:7 wonders is a bad game. By what metric? How is it too random? The card distribution is seeded to match the players, so it largely plays the same no matter the players.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
HOOLY BOOLY posted:Speaking of expansions, does Pandemic:In the Lab assume you bought the other expansions? The rules talked about On the Brink and the Bioterriost alot. Is it possible to play it without those 2 other expansions then? For the most part, no, you don't need OTB to play In the Lab. ITL just mentions it a lot because the purple disease (either mutation or bioterrorist) obeys different rules from the normal diseases, so the rules need to take care to address where it might affect play. However, the "Panic Mutation" variant and the two new brown epidemics are specifically expansions to On the Brink, and can't be used by themselves. That said, the simplest answer is "pony up, buy On the Brink, and never look back." The purple disease is such an important addition to the game that I wouldn't dream of excluding it in anything but a teaching game anymore.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
Malloreon posted:7 wonders is a bad game. The cool thing is that you can play it with up to 7 players; unfortunately, it's best with 3-4, and is too random at 5+. And if you're going to play with 3-4, there are hundreds of better games. Uh, what? So I partly agree with the last part but I disagree. It's hardly a bad game, it's actually very good because it's easy to teach, cards are intuitive (arrows point the directions, color coded, etc), scales very well with any number of players and is relatively fast. I don't see how it's more random at 5+, it's virtually the same regardless of number of people due to scaling. Last night we had a group of 6 and the only options we had was 7 Wonders and Eldritch and it was everyone else's first time playing 7 Wonders and they all loved it and wanted to play it again. However, I do agree that if you have a smaller 3-4 people group, there is a wide variety (dependingly) "better" games to play. Though it still fits a nice niche and it's a staple everyone should have, if only for those 5+ group nights or when you're playing with "casual" people and want to start off with something light-ish. Xaris fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Dec 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
Xaris posted:cards are intuitive (arrows point the directions, color coded, etc) Okay, I personally have enjoyed 7 Wonders every time I've played it, but this is definitely not true, at least not for me. I mean, it's true for the simpler cards, like the ones that give you resources or military points, but as soon as you get to third age (and before that with expansions) you're suddenly drowning in a sea of different symbols that you simply can't parse the first few times playing without constantly checking the reference sheet. I mean, I get why they're doing it, but I still think many cards in 7 Wonders actually lose intuitiveness because of their heavy use of icons rather than text. Hyper Crab Tank fucked around with this message at 00:41 on Dec 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:By what metric? How is it too random? The card distribution is seeded to match the players, so it largely plays the same no matter the players. It's a weird combination of too random and not random enough. Everything is fixed bar the opening hands and the Wonders, but if the hands don't match the Wonders or fall in the wrong place you can be screwed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
Played Le Havre and Hansa Teutonica for the first time over the weekend. Le Havre seems to have more interaction than Agricola and penalties for not feeding you crew are not as dire as Agricola. Also, I do like how everyone shares the cards instead of what you have in your hand. For right now I do prefer Le Havre over Agricola; however, I ma be biased since I'm bad at Agricola. Hansa Teutonica was a pretty solid euro. You have a few choices to make each turn and there does seem to be a balance between making the networks between trade routes and trying to upgrade your actions. This is a zero luck euro so it may not be for everyone. It took me a while to figure our how all of the parts came together and what do even do. It was too late though since the winner made a huge network and the game was over. Lots of competition and interaction in this one. Also, the mechanics seem to encourage blocking other people where it takes a few plays on other games to establish this skill. I'd play it again.You are pushing a a lot of cubes around though. It's not as bad as El Grande in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 01:27 |
|
|
Malloreon posted:7 wonders is a bad game. The cool thing is that you can play it with up to 7 players; unfortunately, it's best with 3-4, and is too random at 5+. And if you're going to play with 3-4, there are hundreds of better games. Hundreds? Really? I'll bite: I've been looking to pick up 7 Wonders for a bit. Give me a list of 100 games better than it, and I'll buy one of them next semester.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 01:14
|
|
