|
What are we counting as a "good use of dice"? If it has to be especially creative then maybe. If it just has to be non-game-ruining then this is just silly. Galaxy Trucker is an excellent game not ruined by dice; King of Tokyo/King of New York are outright dice games that are perfectly fine; etc.
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 22:15 |
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Yeah, I skated by most of that first game I played without picking up any moats because while a couple people bought militias early on nobody bought as many as I did and we eventually hit a point where nobody wanted to play any in favor of using their actions to play villages/markets/mines, but I can absolutely tell that with more aggressive players and the curse deck in play that I would want to grab some defenses early on. You really want to avoid the situation where you have more actions than you can use. If you have five cards in your hand but one is a dead Action card and one is an Estate you started off with, then effectively you just have a 3-card hand. So you Militiaed yourself and paid money to do it! Think how much better off you'd be if that card were a Silver or something else you can use. Occasionally this happens by simple bad luck but it shouldn't happen to the extent you have to plan around it. McNerd fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Dec 17, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 15:08
|
|
|
Big McHuge posted:
The bottom right zone in particular is a special case IMO. It takes two specific changes from the starting position, which is more than any other zone so I usually don't count on this being available. But yeah I think people are a little biased toward choosing the options they've thought more about, and they tend to think more about the options that are currently available, so there's a bias toward the things on the starting timeline. Same reason we didn't change history much for our first couple of games; we were just sticking with what we knew.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
If everything you say is true, why do you bother to play with newbies at all? Why do you even care about the issue of what makes for a good newbie-friendly game? Sounds like you're out for the best gaming experience for yourself, and you have a deep pool of experienced opponents that are eager to play all sorts of games. The rest of us may not be in this situation, and also we may want to play with our friends who we like even though they haven't (yet) developed a terribly enlightened view toward boardgaming. McNerd fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Dec 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
unpronounceable posted:So, I played my first games of Space Alert with two friends today, playing with one shared character. It was an absolute blast. In situations where you play the wrong arrow or play a card upside down, you can use the "tripping" rule. You shift all their actions one space to the right, effectively losing a turn, but get to play the action you intended. I've heard some people don't like it because the fun of the game is in losing horribly, which is true enough, but there's plenty of room to lose horribly without automatically throwing the whole game away over one minor error. The game is still more than hard enough, and losing a turn can still really screw up your plans.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
Aston posted:Obviously it's up to you but I find that the fun is in losing horribly because you didn't quite make it to the gun in time/looking out of the window because you thought you'd dealt with everything/general incompetence as opposed to losing horribly because one guy played a red arrow instead of a blue and spent the whole mission wandering through the ship pressing buttons at random. If you don't use the trip rule, at least a few missions will be completely wasted because of it. This, and if it makes the game too easy, you can always raise the difficulty. You'll have just as many catastrophes but they'll be bigger and more elaborate (never mind more thematic). Everyone wins.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
Mannekin Pis only giving coins as a starting resource is pretty lovely for the people sitting next to you, since they don't get the option to buy some resource from you. I guess the neighbors might wind up getting some of those coins; then again they might not, especially with Cities in play. Mannekin Pis A is fine when your neighbors play something boring like Giza, but with more exotic powers it can get really unbalanced one way or another. Sitting next to Rome B is awful: I just get to play my garbage fourth Leader and I don't even get the full Rome discount on it. Abu Simbel B? Nice, I get Abu Simbel B with a third Wonder stage tacked on; that'll probably be decent. Great Wall? Heaven: I can pick whatever specialized option helps me the most and ignore the rest. I honestly have no idea what to make of Mannekin Pis B. McNerd fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:I doubt it, not starting with a resource and only four coins means you can only buy two resources and how many times do you use the resource you start with? More than twice a game, I'd wager. It's not saving Mannekin Pis any draft picks to start with coins and is quite possibly leaving them at a resource deficit. And I would say those four coins are gonna find the way to their neighbours, to do otherwise is kind of a waste since money is there to be spent Sure, I'd say Mannekin Pis's starting coin is a bit weak for the Mannekin Pis player and for their neighbors. (In a game with enough players, of course both can simultaneously be true.) One neighbor might not see a penny; maybe neither will, if it's all spent on Leaders and black cards. Even assuming you do give me 2 of your 4 coins, I have less use for them than normal, since you're likely not to have a lot of resources for me to buy. (Not just for lack of a starting resource but because you plan to copy my resources and build my Wonder.) quote:and the thing I argue is that if you have a wonder copying wonder, your wonder stages are never going to be better than everyone else's stages and you're probably more likely to end up with bullshit that doesn't synergise with your wonder since your wonder has no intrinsic synergies and doesn't synergise with the other stages either. I think the odds are likely stacked against Pis in the long run but that perfect storm of copied stages may come around every once in a while and dominate. Perhaps more often still you'll just end up with the usual "two wonder stages that score flat points, one decent ability" which puts you firmly in the realm of most of the other wonders but slightly worse because you don't start with a resource that helps you build the wonder stages. This all comes out to me thinking Pis A is probably on the low-mid end of the spectrum. In my games which is a fair few but I'll grant you I don't see Pis get played too often, Pis has won exactly one game and that game was being played with Babel so that's useless. This mirrors my thoughts: it fluctuates between awful and overpowered, but usually just a bit subpar and unfocused due to lack of any synergies designed-in. But it's not much of an endorsement! McNerd fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Do people use Spy at all in high-level games? I'm relatively new, and while it doesn't look that great I used it as a jerryrigged non-terminal engine piece when there was nothing else there. Spy is pretty weak 99% of the time. It should also cost $3 instead of $4 not that it would fix anything. Things to do with Spy:
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:
Jesus Christ, no, don't do this. Beginners will never, ever, ever find that strategy on that board. It took extremely experienced players using computer simulations. They won't even find one that wins 50% of the time. And if you rub this in their face, they're very likely to conclude that they'll never be good enough at this game to beat BM. Fortunately most boards not only have playable non-BM strategies, but have strategies that are significantly easier to execute. McNerd fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Jan 10, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:The 89% winrate is pretty spergy but the engine that beats Big Money isn't that hard to find? Dominionstrategy says that you can get 75% winrate out of Village/Smithy/Market with a militia and some Remodeling. That's just 3 cards that have a not unapparent combo plus an attack- the trasher will be a little harder to understand but that's Dominion for you. How many Villages/Smithies/Markets? How many Silvers/Golds? In what order do you buy all these cards? When do you start greening or buying Duchies? These are highly nontrivial questions (especially for beginners) and you are not getting above 50% without at least decent answers. Oh, and you forgot about the Cellars. Only two copies though; two is the right number of Cellars, apparently.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:that said still probably going to end up playing it a lot more in future because it's way fun and I want to try the approach where you play a million cards and draw your entire deck too. You absolutely can do this; it's how a lot of the best strategies work, including in the First Game set. Just a couple basic tips for pulling it off:
McNerd fucked around with this message at 16:53 on Jan 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
Mice and Mystics would be a wonderful game to play with children, so I hate to badmouth it; but if you don't have any around, pass. I don't have anything against adults doing young-adult things or anything like that, but this game is not made for you.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Mega64 posted:e: Also I'm totally a rules interrupter whenever my friend explains games to new people and now that it's getting pointed out I'll probably stop doing it. I think (and hope!) it's one thing when you're actually pointing out slips of the tongue and crucial omissions. Sometimes the person explaining actually does mess something up. But other times they have a plan for explaining and you're just interfering. One thing that can help, when you're not sure. Instead of jumping in and explaining it yourself, wait for a pause (or wait until they're done) and then remind your friend as unobtrusively as possible, and let them decide how to handle it from there. So if my friend's explaining Monopoly and they seem to have forgotten to explain jail, I'd just say "Uh, jail?" and then if they had it under control they can just wave me off and continue. Of course even this can get obnoxious if you do it all the time or with an air of criticism, so, you know, common sense.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Speaking of Imperial Assault, how much do you lose out if you play through the campaign missions with a different play group every week? Is it like Risk Legacy where that totally defeats the purpose of running a campaign? Or like say the Space Alert expansion where it's pretty flexible? My friend who owns the game just intends to bring it to our regularly scheduled game night and play with whoever happens to show up that day. It's probably not what I would do if I owned the game, but is it bad enough that I should warn him he's shooting himself in the foot?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
Clockwork Gadget posted:You could play this way, but it'd be a pretty lovely way to play Imperial Assault. The campaign path is fairly rigid, with set story missions that tell a complete arc, and experiencing the campaign as a whole unit is really what gives the game its draw. A large part of the strategy of the game is building your character over the course of the campaign and learning how best to play it with the skill upgrades/item upgrades/other teammates that you've chosen. Having different groups just dropping in and grabbing characters would eliminate a lot of what makes the game unique over, like, any other random minis combat game you could name. Thanks, this is exactly what I was afraid you'd say. I'll send this post to him and let him decide how to handle it. If I recall correctly there were more than 4 heroes to choose from. How bad would it be to split the difference, have 6 Rebel players with their own specific characters, let them tag in when they show up, and then fill them in on what they missed?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
It does move fast! A big thank-you to the people who answered my Imperial Assault questions. Just to regurgitate complaints I've heard about Dead of Winter:
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:This sums up how I feel about Temporum so far. I am a huge fan of Dominion and it may well be the better game, but I can list a lot of things Temporum does better: * Better theme, if you're into that. * Better game flow, shorter turns. * Supports up to 5 players (without turning to poo poo). * It has a basic newbie strategy akin to Big Money: just draw, play cards for money, and score. But it's not boring or automatic to play like this, nor is it frustrating to lose against it. These aren't problems for advanced Dominion players but they're undeniably annoying for beginners. * More direct player interaction baked into the core rules. Absent attack cards you can ignore your opponent in Dominion (not that it's advisable, but some people do and then complain about it). You really can't in Temporum; they just took over that Time you needed to rule, or they changed history so you can't go to that Zone you needed. The basic core strategy is pretty tamper-resistant, but anything else you try to do is subject to interference, accidental or purposeful. McNerd fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Mar 20, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:I've not played, so I'm genuinely asking: how is draw, play for money, score NOT boring and automatic? There are a lot of decisions along the way. At a minimum you still have to decide which cards to play and which to score; what order to do all these things in; where to move your crowns when you score; what Zones to use to perform these actions (typically there are at least 2 Zones that let you draw and 3 that let you play cards, and they'll have little bonuses and side effects); whether to change history and mess with people, etc. If you get all these things wrong you're still heading toward the finish line at the bare minimum baseline rate, but the benefits of getting them right can add up. Beyond that, you're presented with a lot more opportunities to deviate from this simplistic plan in small ways without shooting yourself in the foot. You can visit a wacky Age 4 zone for a turn if it looks juicy, or exploit some card combo that comes up, get a little edge from it and then go back to what you were doing. Again I'm comparing to Dominion, where if you decide to play a BM-like strategy, you can't just say "Oh wait, King's Court/Bridge is cool, maybe I'll toss a couple of those in too." McNerd fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Mar 20, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
Zveroboy posted:Oh BoardGameGeek, what a delightful collection of manchildren you have. I love that he didn't even ask if this was practical or wise, or was going to work, or whether it was just a bizarre dick move; he asked if it's "evil." Can any one man truly be trusted with the power to brainwash an entire company through his poo poo board game? With great power comes great responsibility.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Nobody's talked about Coup: Guatemala 1954 in this thread yet? Surely some of you folks have played it? For anyone unaware, this is exactly Coup with the 5 roles chosen at random from a large pool. (There's always a money role, a getting-new-cards role, and an attack role) I just played my first few games and enjoyed it but it did sort of reinforce my initial concern. One of the best things about Coup is it's a quick filler game with a very short learning curve before you start to approach the zen state of pure mindgames. G54 adds a fair bit of complexity at the basic "knowing the cards" level of the game, and I'm not sure how long it'll take to get past that. I'll definitely still be pulling out the original game when we have new players around.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:Step aside Sentinels of the Multiverse, I think we have a new contender for worst art in games: https://boardgamegeek.com/image/2235522/coup-guatemala-1954 The art style is way too awful to be unintentional; I'm thinking it must be a reference to some Latin American artist? But yeah, still. I didn't want to complain because it's some small publisher and proceeds are going to charity. But since you bring it up I have to admit the component quality is pretty awful all around. The worst game coins I ever saw; dubious English with some words misspelled; full rules explanation for each card is on a separate card with tiny print (though hopefully you won't need it much). The rules reference cards are a little taller and labeled on the top, so you can use them as dividers to help with setup, which is a nice touch, but you can't leave them vertical when you put the game away or the box won't close.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:
Guide is one of the fastest cycling cards I've ever seen for $3? Every time you use it you basically skip a turn of the game, so there's your problem solved.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
App integration is terrible except for audio tracks and timers, and scoring apps, and Dominion setup randomizers, and probably dozens of other good ideas that people will come up with.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
Gort posted:Well, "explore" and "get your character as many good items and stat boosts as you can to give yourself a better chance of winning the haunt". It's true that there are elements of game setup in the pre-haunt part of the game, but the flipside of that is that the time spent doing actual pre-game setup is near zero. Whack down the center pieces, pick a character, go. But there's nothing you can voluntarily do to get good items and stat boosts. You just explore randomly and hope to draw good cards and roll good dice. The thing that really kills me is there's no tension. You're never afraid to open that door, because you have to open it, and for all intents and purposes it's the same thing behind every door, so why worry about it? The only thing you're worried about is that you'll run out of movement speed before you hit a useful room. Literally the only source of tension is "what if I can't run through the haunted house fast enough?" You can (and should) work to put yourself in the right mood to enjoy it more, but the mechanics ought to reinforce the mood, not work against it. I think a nice try would at least have been to make this a push-your-luck minigame: the more rooms you go through in one turn the more you accumulate bonuses, but if you hit a bad thing you might lose them all. Then you're actually worried, do I dare open this door? Literally every push-your-luck game I know has been more tense than the Betrayal setup phase, and that includes some profoundly stupid dice games.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
Morels is a fine little game. It's a quick, light 2P game with nice art and enough depth to stay interesting for as long as I've had it. Its biggest problem is that I slightly prefer Lost Cities, for the same niche; but I could see someone preferring Morels, or of course owning both for variety.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
Poopy Palpy posted:My favorite part of The Secret History of Dominion is the paragraph where Donald considers making it a poo poo Parade and figures out straight away all the reasons (which apparently never came up during Ascension's playtesting) that it was a bad idea. Ditto for multiple resource types. Yeah yeah, he turned around and made Alchemy, but even if you're a Potion hater you have to admit he handled it a lot better than games like Ascension did.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
BonHair posted:DoW is a fine experience generator, but a terrible game. Some people just don't care for "balance" and "meaningful choices" if they can have awesome narratives. It's clearly true that some people feel this way, but those people are misguided. Balance and meaningful choices are key ways in which the game mechanics can contribute to a good narrative. Balance allows for dramatic tension where you don't know who's going to win. Meaningful choices force you to think about them and engage with the plot. If these people just want a great narrative, they should go watch a movie together. Professional movie producers will give you a far better narrative with far better visual stimulation than a deck of cards. If they want a semidecent narrative and they want to have some control over it, and rules that force them to pay attention to what's going on, they should play an RPG (probably a rules-light freeform affair). So why would they choose a board game as their narrative vehicle? Well for one thing, people just don't know about the existence of good light RPGs. For another, maybe they demand agency plus a tiny bit of visual stimulation, and there's a dearth of light RPGs that incorporate visual art (unless you count, say, Gloom or the DnD boardgames). Otherwise it's because good mechanics can enhance the narrative by providing real win-or-lose stakes and a real challenge. I'm a big believer in that. But bad mechanics don't do that, they just put a bunch of fiddly busywork in between you and some B-movie plot. And the worst part is that because the "experience generator" crowd currently has such low standards, there's not as much incentive for game designers to make experience generators that actually are worth playing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
BonHair posted:Yes, I agree with all of these points basically. Except that some people are too lazy to set up a decent RPG, and would just like to open a box and get the same experience, without anyone having to do any serious preparation. And they would like to be in control, but they don't care too much whether their choices have meaningful and predictable outcomes. They just want to make a "choice" and have it result in something that they can construe into a narrative. Like a railroaded RPG essentially, except the railroad is randomly laid out instead of predetermined. It comes down to players not wanting to think too hard and just make thematic decisions, which good mechanics and meaningful choices actually do get in the way of. Well, RPGwise I'm thinking about something like Fiasco, or even sillier like Wushu or Everyone Is John. A lot of games coming out these days that you can just bullshit your way through without a GM or prep or brains.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:They also have Dominion: Dark Ages for $24, how is that expansion? I haven't played that one. Also, my B&N has plenty of stuff left from that sale, so it doesn't hurt to check. It's fantastic, but also a considerable jump in complexity. Among other things you have a lot of cards that come and go making it harder to keep track of what's in your deck. jeeves posted:He says Dominion expansions are like Star Trek movies, only about half of them are good with the other half being not mentionable. Dark Ages seems like one of the good ones I am guessing. This is silly. Honestly it doesn't really even make that much sense to say an entire expansion is bad; it makes more sense to talk about good and bad cards, and all expansions have some fantastic cards. But of course we have to make purchasing decisions somehow. Alchemy is sort of an exception since it's almost all Potion cards, which some people hate categorically, but all other expansions contain a wide variety of cards and don't adhere completely to any given theme.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Vineyards is a nice card too if you pretend its cost reads "4". This would probably be okay but Vineyards doesn't need the help; it's already probably the strongest Kingdom Victory card in the game.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:The cost change isn't intended as a buff, it's intended as a way to put it in the game at all without using the terrible Potion mechanic. (If I recall correctly, DXV mentioned at one point that Vineyards and Gardens originally had their costs reversed, with Vineyards in the base game.) But what exactly is your problem with Potion? There are two major complaints I've heard, and neither of them are issues for Vineyard.
McNerd fucked around with this message at 01:21 on Apr 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Speaking of small and fast games, is the Coup expansion better for big groups or is it still good for say 2-4 players? It's become my go to pub/coffee shop game and people get into it quick, so I was curious about the add-on. The Coup expansion has three independent parts.
McNerd fucked around with this message at 19:20 on May 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
May 27, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Sockser posted:Is there a way to make King of Tokyo fun? I've played like four games and I have yet to use the poison tokens or whatever they are. It's not super clear what exactly your complaint is. The poison tokens and some other components go with particular cards that I guess you haven't seen yet. I don't know what your friends are doing but if they are too aggressive then you should let them knock each other out while you hang back rolling hearts and stars. Someone has to keep the person in Tokyo from running away with the game, but if your other opponents are willing to do the job for you, then let them. McNerd fucked around with this message at 04:14 on May 29, 2015 |
|
#
¿
May 29, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
Zveroboy posted:
Actually in a lot of games, this is quite lucky. What would you rather do: get all that crap out of the way and then buy Provinces the rest of the time, or have a bunch of $7 hands? Of course the ideal would be if the hand full of Estates can be on the bottom of the deck, and then maybe the game ends before you get there. Or at least they miss the reshuffle. But still, pretty good.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 13:05
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I should probably just go ahead and mail-order Tash Kalar and Argent at this rate. Thanks for the feedback everyone. How about Reiner Knizia's "Samurai"? Part of his so-called "tile-laying trilogy," all of which I believe are supposed to be quite good. I always thought it would be very cool to have a game that mimics the pace of a classic samurai standoff/duel. (Or a Western duel, which is more or less the same.) A long buildup with moves themed around subtle maneuvering and quiet conversation, followed by a very short, climactic endgame clash. A lot of strategy about predicting when that endgame will occur. Maybe I'll try and make such a thing one of these days.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
Archenteron posted:Speaking of Dominion, there's apparently a tournament at an LGS this weekend (Apparently it's a prequalifier for the Dominion World Championships at Gencon but there's also store credit prizes) 3 player games, all expansions will be used. That's all the information I know. I'm pretty much only familiar with basegame + Intrigue. What else should I know/be on the lookout for, strategy/super-bomb-card-wise? Don't buy Rats unless you know how to use it. You will probably wreck your deck. I can tell you how if you're interested; it's not as hard as people think, but in your case probably easiest to ignore it. If you play with Colony/Platinum, then Colonies are usually the way to win. These games last longer so (relative to a normal game) slow and steady is better than a money strategy that rushes straight for the finish line. Rebuild is pretty overpowered. Your plan is to play it over and over and over. If you (and others) buy up all the Ill Gotten Gains then both it and Curses will run out simultaneously; then you can pile out Duchies for the win. This catches a lot of people off guard. Doesn't work so well if the IGG/Curse piles get out of sync due to other Cursers, Moat, etc. Scrying Pool is usually very important. Ignore the attack; it's all about trashing your non-Actions and then using SP to draw tons of cards at a time. Hunting Party leads to easy decks. Buy 1-3 Silvers, one Gold, and one other card that produces at least $2 (ideally with a nice effect like Militia). The idea is to get enough Hunting Parties that every turn you will draw one of every different card in your deck, and that will add up to a very regular $8. Obviously to do this you can't add too many more types of cards; watch out for Duchies, Curses, etc. Don't ignore Goons, Tournament, Wharf, Ambassador, or any cursing attack.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2015 15:22
|
|
|
Poopy Palpy posted:Not really. Nobles is a bad action card at $6, that's why it has to be worth points. Scout is a bad card, and putting Scout in your deck to draw a bad card isn't a great combo. The trouble of course is that if Scout doesn't draw at least one Victory card, it's actively detrimental. (In fact I'd argue that even if it draws one card each time, it's still slightly detrimental). So in order for Scout to even benefit you--never mind being better than alternative buys like Silver--your deck needs to be well over 25% Victory cards; I'd say closer to 50%. You're not really going to have that with Nobles until well into the endgame, maybe. You could get there with Great Hall but that's going so far out of your way it isn't worth it. The other thing about Nobles is you want to use its village option as little as possible. Consider that +3 Cards is the equivalent of Smithy, a $4 value, whereas a plain +2 Actions is horrible: worse than any of the $2 villages. So if you build an engine based on Nobles, it's not really so important to add more card draw like Scout. Instead the best plan is to supplement with better Villages, which will free your Nobles up to do what they're best at. And of course those Villages are going to reduce the percentage of Victory cards in your deck, making Scout worse.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Scout+Island just sounds way too slow to be worth it Another idea is Scrying Pool or Herald. These have the advantage that you might get to draw and play the Scout for free instead of its displacing another card, so it won't be detrimental in the way I described before. All these combos do exist, but Scout is so weak that it needs a lot of help to become viable. Like if you go over all the synergies discussed on this page and you can find a way to do 2-4 of them at the same time then it could add up to a viable plan. But it's so rare, and there still might be better things on the board. Anyway Vagrant is the card Scout wants to be. All the same synergies, none of the drawbacks, and it doesn't text you at night promising to draw your whole deck if you just treat it right.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 22:15 |
|
|
silvergoose posted:Takes a long time, the endgame is literally just "take that" until people run out of "take that" cards and then the next person wins. And the jokes are painfully unfunny if you have taste. And even if you don't have taste, it has the same problem as most "cards with jokes on them" games. You can only play it 3-4 times before you've seen all the jokes, and then you need another reason to play. There might be some all-star comedy writers who could make an entire game's worth of jokes that never get stale, but those people are very rare and probably not in the board game business. Frankly most people couldn't make a game's worth of jokes that are funny the first time, so it shouldn't surprise anyone to hear that Steve Jackson can't either.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2015 17:06
|
|