|
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
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
echoMateria posted:You just need an artist to start printing money. There is always space for a new zombie game on Kickstarter. Pfft, Artists. Introducing Cards Against Zombies.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
I played a lot of Avalon over the weekend because we had between 5-9 players the whole time. And when we had 5, we were pretty tired and not willing to start anything else. We did play Creationary and Cards Against Humanity and I only really had them out due to numbers and needing a break from Avalon. I did get maybe 20 minutes to teach Space Alert to 3 people as well. We played Avalon with no power roles or with Merlin/Percival/Mordred. We started without powers, brought them in and only went back to no powers when we dropped to 5 players. It was the first time I got to play a lot of games in a row and I'm really glad I did because the game doesn't tire that much with a large group. It's fast enough that people get to swap roles and not get bored. I had a very good win % but probably because I was mostly evil.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
Pander posted:It can be super quarterbacky. I'm very tactically minded, and my gf is not. So as the turn progresses, I'm plotting out how to squeeze every possible point of attack and defense, how to manage threat, etc, and basically end up telling her what to do because she suffers from AP and a short attention span when it comes to these games. She consequently does not like LotR LCG, even though she LOVES LotR. Same.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
They put in a gold resource in Catan with one of the expansions. You get gold when you don't get other resources, and it's used exclusively for trading, with the bank mostly.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Any good pirate or viking themed games floating about?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2015 05:48
|
|
|
Wazzu posted:I like Libertalia for a pirate themed game - it's got a very Pirates of the Caribbean feel to it IMO, with the game being about secret card selection to gain better booty. I'll give it a look. Thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2015 06:54
|
|
|
Did anyone post this? https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/elanlee/exploding-kittens Basic card drawing russian roulette game. Wacky Internet humour. Illustrated by the Oatmeal. Goal $10 K. So far $2.5 M. 28 days to go.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 08:42
|
|
|
Yeah, knows how to sell to the internet crowd that's for sure.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 08:46
|
|
|
My Cards Against Humanity loving friends asked our group if there was interest in it. So yeah, I know people who will like it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 08:49
|
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:Wait, so the game takes three weeks to play and I spend 95% of my time standing in place and yelling? But Arkham Horror already exists.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2015 03:36
|
|
|
I played Dead of Winter last night and it seems fine enough, but either I was too exhausted or the rulebook needs more clarification/less ambiguity. I guess it's on us since but it seemed easy to miss. Needs an FAQ section. Errors: We moved survivors multiple times when we shouldn't have. This might have changed up some spawns, but might have saved us some food tokens. Hard to tell the complete effect on the game. We risked more exposure and required more food. We couldn't figure out the starvation token thing, so we reduced morale more than we should have. It's a nice state management kind of game. The secret objectives seem fine enough. Couldn't find clarification if we could talk about them, but we did anyway. The Betrayer couldn't meet their objective so they just let us succeed instead of being a downer.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2015 22:42
|
|
|
Trill Sandwich posted:Uh, what? They are pretty explicitly supposed to be secret, hence the name. Also the betrayer should be trying their hardest to tank the game in my experience, if they can't get their initial objective, they get a new one after being exiled. Secret usually means "don't reveal", I'm sure lying is an option if people start talking about them. It is a matter of trust. I'm fairly certain there is a game or two I've played that handle secret information that way - you canh talk but not reveal so it becomes a matter of trust and deception. The Betrayer didn't get exiled though, so they didn't get the chance. They only revealed after the game so we didn't know.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
Guess he figured he could do it got to the pointy end of the game. I heard talk around here about people tanking the game if they couldn't get their objective done.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:The Secret Objectives to me in Dead of Winter seem completely backwards. If you think about what their aim is, the secret objectives are meant to sow distrust among the players by forcing them to keep resources that they would actually want to use to help themselves/the group. This sort of resource-keeping is thus meant to instill conflict in the game by having people say 'wait, why are you keeping this food, we need it!' in order to evoke the classic scenes in zombie films in which someone is found hoarding stuff because of their self-serving need. I guess it is also meant to create a feeling of having to make sacrifices/hard choices for the player. There are a lot of objective cards, so it's either going to be hard to memorise them all or not being able to fake convincingly. You could probably claim the secondary stuff to your objective as the Betrayer if it's fairly basic too. Like "I need one of each item type".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
Titles would be a tricky part. I'd have to be more familiar with them to know what's up. It's at least a lot more than Archipelago.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
BL, I like how the top tier is to give you a vacation.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
Is the list satirical?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2015 01:08
|
|
|
It's entirely reasonable to have objectively less luck than other people. It's right there on the character sheet.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
Aston posted:Everyone I play with complains about getting Blue Shirt because it's boring but it's my favourite role. http://www.theresistanceonline.com/ ??
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 12:33
|
|
|
How heavy is OGRE?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
Eldritch Horror, I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
How the hell does that even work? navigating by sound in a board game.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
It's an okay game that can sometimes be too long and often relies too much on chance.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:It's much better than Arkham Horror though. I enjoyed the time that I played it, and I wouldn't object to playing it again, but it's definitely not as good as many other games that I have access to nowadays. The movement rules in Eldritch aren't really that burdensome, despite Lottery's big paragraph to make it seem confusing. The tickets are a good way to make movement easier and allow for planning ahead if you don't want to take other city actions, like getting equipment.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:They're not difficult to understand mechanically, but they're fiddly in ways that slow the game down for no reason, and lead to far more discussion and time being sunk into simple moves than should have been necessary. Even though they're intended to be used for planning future turns, half the time our use of tickets was "first action, gain a ticket, second action, spend that ticket to move two spaces" to jump from one named city to another -- would simply allowing you to take the move action twice have been so terrible? Even if you just get rid of the "the free move has to be taken first" rule and let all players take their action steps simultaneously (which is what we settled on), the game starts moving much faster and loses no content in the process. Which is good, because in my experience Eldritch is usually fun for the first couple hours, but then just keeps going. I don't see how tickets can slow down the game with discussion, since you just go "yep, taking a ticket, moving to here then here thanks to the ticket". As far as moving twice, you'd then have it be "move twice if you start in a city", because the wilderness/ocean spaces you can't get tickets on. The debt's seem fine to me. You get something now in return for a potentially bad thing later, which is a reoccuring theme with the reckonings. You end up having a lot of swords having over your head that may drop at any point to create tension in a way.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
Shark Spider
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
I'm expecting a curveball.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
Variety in CaH makes it less tedious. So people doing something other than being as obscene as possible helps.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
Meta commentary. Take away from it what you will.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
Macdeo Lurjtux posted:Does anyone play Dead of Winter? I picked up a copy but two quick questions; I'm hazy on this, but I think the starvation only comes into effect if you don't have enough food for the pile. So the starvation tokens increase every time you starve, and just sit there doing nothing every time you successfully feed everyone.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
In the Lab Expansion for Pandemic is great because it shifts the focus away from card hoarding. Instead of needing 5 of a kind at once, you split it up into smaller steps requiring less cards at a time, but you need to also work on treating cubes at the same time. Base Pandemic has the problem of it being simply a game of getting five of a kind while avoiding game over. You end up with the researcher and scientist being more important the more players involved. If you play with two players you almost never need to pass cards, but adding more players creates card scarcity and the passing becomes crucial. But it's often, as stated by others, too restrictive that you need to coordinate to the degree of restricting players input. Needing 4 instead of five cards or being able to pass unrestricted become ways around this. In the lab also includes roles with less restrictive passing rules so players don't get tied down to using a whole turn to pass a single card and get quarterbacked.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
Forbidden Desert is good too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
It's has three yellow cubes on it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Hanabi and Space Alert both have ways of reducing quarterbacking in a coop and should probably be introduced into more games in some way. Both games reduce communication which is one of main necessities of Quarterbacking. Space Alert does it via time pressure for the most part. Hanabi has it baked into the rules though. Hanabi has a second way of doing it and that's via incomplete information. Normally, in a coop game, information is practically public. However, because Hanabi prevents players from seeing their own cards, they have a reduced control over their own ability to play and have to better collaborate to focus on influencing the play of the rest of the table. Hanabi can still be quarterbacked, somewhat, by establishing a system of discarding and developing a pattern of emphasis when giving out clues, but it's nowhere near the level of what can be done in Pandemic, Arkham Horror or Ghost Stories. The whole point of playing cooperative games is communication with other players to coordinate. I would go so far as to say you reduce quarterbacking by requiring, or putting an emphasis on, communication. Taking the same examples: In Space Alert you need to communicate with other players, because you don't know what they've done by looking at their board. And maybe someone has updated the game board during the action part of the game, but you need to ask Bob, what turn he's shooting the Blue cannon so you can make sure you synergise. In Hanabi, which I've never played, it seems to be all about refining your clues via communication. It's information you need to limit, so that no one player can know everything, hence requiring players to communicate. Another way to reduce quarterbacking is to get input from all players and increase communication. Just get everyone talking. THat's the group puzzle strategy thing, but that's what cooperative games are all about. Working together.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
I've had probably more reliance on quarterbacking in Space Alert, because people expect me to tell them what to do and keep track of everything and coordinate the team. You do kind of need at least one person to track everything, but I try to split up tasks ie try and get one person track the incoming threats handles those tasks, one person keeps track of the trajectories of threats, one person handles the energy supply, and one person tries to keep an idea of where everyone is and coordinate actions. Problem is I don't have many people to play with that have a lot of experience with it and they default to relying on me. I have maybe one or two other people in my regular circles that actually likes the game and can handle it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:For example, on Boardgame Arena, there's an unwritten rule that players discard the rightmost/oldest card in your hand unless a clue states otherwise. This means you can wait to give a clue about having a five until the five gets to the rightmost position. As an aside, I hate the weird meta play that develops on online games. It's bad, for instance, on The Resistance Online where regular players have some unspoken rules which they freak out over if they are not followed precisely - making playing with strangers not worth the time.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
Is there a review post.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
So it's a Kingmaking no matter what you do. If you don't hurt the leader, you're making them king. If you hurt the leader, you're making someone else king. So they can just deal with it. If they wanted to win maybe they shouldn't have relied on you to help them. The last place player is just bitter and wanted to get a morale victory over you.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
sector_corrector posted:Oh, also, my friends have really gotten into ON:UW. I'm considering running a play-by-post mafia game for them over email, so that they can get an idea of what the original game is like. The Mafia thread in this forum is... loving insane, and I don't want to talk to those people. Can anyone recommend a good set of roles and rules? The discussion thread may not be helpful, but you might try asking here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3743445&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=1 and you might get more useful suggestions even if it's mostly the same people, the thread doesn't go off topic.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2015 22:06
|
|