|
We effectively play Mage Knight with the PvP combat rules off, but we may consider changing that. For competitive play, I wouldn't be surprised if we started implementing some of the "screw the leader" options for dealing with whenever someone is able to pull ahead very early. I wouldn't mind playing with magic glades on in order to offer more options to players that get screwed over by movement. That Mage Tower house rule though seems like it would be very easy to pull all the spells someone would want out of a single mage tower.
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 13:02 |
|
|
For positivity here's Bottom Shelf Board Games, which could use a signal boost. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htW1WRmN_1Y Enjoy beautifully shot board game tables with concise reviews and descriptions.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
Nah if anything it will serve to get people to believe that games should be based around the intangible concept of "Fun" and that random luck games are the center of game design.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
The best thing about the south is the stories you have to tell people about it after you've escaped.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
Trip report, played test game of Archipelago with girlfriend. It is good and when the slavery card came up we both made a face. We were, as we tend to when playing a game for the first time with just the two of us, playing fairly nice in order to get a feel for how the mechanisms work in play. It's interesting how much time you can spend just trying to assemble the right resources to build something if you don't trade w/ people, and what a massive loving rear end in a top hat move it is to build towns anywhere at all. I especially like the market manipulation aspect of putting resources on foreign and domestic markets. Being first to export fish is great and far better than tax early on, but that kind of strategy quickly takes a nose dive as they fill. Then, after a crisis or two, you really want to be the guy sitting on a bunch of pineapples. It is entirely possible to, in a 2-player game, wind up with neither player pursuing either of themselves or each other's game-ending strategies. But you can start to accelerate to the end fairly quickly if you think you're ahead. Calling people on that looks very interesting. All in all, I think it will be our go-to for when we have friends over whose experience is Catan but could definitely play a harder game. It is Way Better Catan. 10/10 great game.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
I got into this hobby exactly one year too late  Megaman's Jockstrap posted:
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Lorini is right, though, that certain types of games aren't often discussed here that do have a lot of information available on BGG. The heaviest games tend to be mentioned only briefly, which I think has to do with the fact that we only have one general discussion board game thread. That we usually aren't discussing trash-tier games is great, but there's still more chat about relatively lightweight games than there is about Arkwright. (I know there was a conversation about that a little bit ago, but it is rare.)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
Come to think of it, a good model for a game store would be a head shop. Exciting, easy to use stuff up front and complicated things with lots of moving pieces lining the walls behind the counter. Addictive things people buy every time they come in there by the register. Scrupulously clean and located right next to a bar preferably.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
There are multiplayer settings for Level99 games but they tend to be quite poor compared to the 2 player options. Plus, none of the Level 99 game library is about cards affecting the other cards you play. Options: You could go with Puzzle Strike which is a competitive, head to head combo-based deckbuilder that uses pogs instead of cards. It plays about as fast as Dominion. Mage Knight plays for much longer but hits a sweet spot at 3. There's combo-based deck-building elements to it and the whole game is about the puzzle of optimizing a hand you've drawn while moving across a fantasy map. Seasons is a game about drafting a set of cards that plays well with between 2 and 4 players which is all about getting the most out of a few cards picked at the beginning of the game. edit: and you can probably pick it up + an expansion for 50 dollars.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Board Game Arena literally has Tash-Kalar built in to the website. Just sign up and open up a game table. It's got good functionality to it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:I love teaching board games, but then I love teaching poo poo in general. Teaching a game well enough that people get right in to it and want to play again is super rewarding IMO.    I actually rehearse rules explanations for my friends and now suddenly I can play Mage Knight with non-gaming types. Speaking of this thread's recommendations, thanks Lorini for talking about Vinhos earlier. That's going to be my first 600lb. euro. Impermanent fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Feb 4, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
Can you elaborate on what you liked and didn't like about Orleans? I backed the kickstarter recently based on good, vague word of moth. I played Deus recently and while I liked it, it's not something I would buy without additional purchases. Discarding cards for resources seems good but it is still possible to get screwed by the deck, I think.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:
This is very true. Don't be like me and let your first Terra Mystica experience be a two player test run to try the game out. It will feel like a slog.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:What do you guys think about controlling a couple factions? Is there some way to make that work? Or have you guys tried the suggestions on BGG to cover part of the map? I really want to play this with some friends, but the only way it's going to be tolerable I think is if a few of us play it prior so I'm not the only one who knows the rules and realistically that's going to mean playing it 2p. You may be overestimating the issue this game will have with explanations. Because every race has a sweet little tableau a lot of rules begin to explain themselves, which makes it much easier to learn than other games of its type.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
Will the kickstarter add-on package of Dungeon Lords be sold seperately? I would like some of the new goodies and I missed the KS.
Impermanent fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Feb 9, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Keyflower boxing would have a sort of thematic elegance.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Talisman is a good choice for Rutibex because no one would argue that the game sells because of its design. edit: yeah bananagrams is a cool game.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
I am also sad about this but I guess kickstarters tend to at least command high prices as resale.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
You should both play with the starter decks so that it's easier for her to see your possible patterns.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
The starter decks are the number one way to begin your tash-kalar journey, but honestly don't be afraid to mess around with the other decks once you have had a game or two in the mirror match. They are going to make you unlearn a lot of safe placement habits and force you to reconsider the game, which is tight.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Goonsensus is that it's terrible and mechanically inferior to BS:G while also being thematically inferior to everything that isn't a zombie game.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
I agree, and this is my central problem with group bluffing games. It's why poker doesn't work - people want to be the cool guy who bluffs everyone out of the pot, or who challenges a ridiculous bluff with their own double bluff because it feels cooler than doing statistically good play. These types of games always introduce to players an element of roleplaying or of meta gaming that naturally destroys reasonable play. It takes everyone in a group having a very particular mindset in order to enjoy those kinds of games, and that group is too rare, usually, to keep that up. In fact, there's only one game I can think of that doesn't fall prey to this, and that is Coup. IT's still vulnerable to "challenge everything" suicide runs, but since getting knocked out early of a larger round spells having to sit out for a bit, people are more attached to actually playing well. People love winning in a risky way and it's a psychological problem that is very hard to design around in bluffing games around. Poorly-designed games like ONUW exacerbate the problem, smarter games like Coup mitigate it, but it always exists. Even money doesn't really help or there wouldn't be gambling addicts. People love to feel vindicated by dice rolls. That's why there are some people who don't even want to play Catan with the cards, because it isn't "truly random" and makes the whims of the cards or dice feel like like god giving you a thumbs up. fozzy fosbourne posted:
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2015 00:20
|
|
|
You need to learn what their "default" patterning is so that you can build in a way that gives you opportunities without letting your opponent guess your plan. Imperial is easy because their patterns are simple to understand. Green wants to expand quickly with holes in their pattern and yellow dominates a smaller area.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Both of these games, while good, still don't cover all the ground there is in fighting games systems. Keep it up!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
It's the same problem everywhere. It's not like boardgames have a monopoly on fanbases that are almost intolerant to criticism. Movies have had this problem for ages. You could argue that video games have it even worse, as people want to define what a 'good game' is without having a concept of 'good' or 'game.' The issue that most -game mediums have is that their barrier to entry is much higher than movies or TV, which simply require you to be able to watch and listen. (I know. It takes more effort than that to actually engage with a good movie. But you can successfully get to the end of anything by watching and listening.) It will take a long time before we even have something equivalent to an Oscars. As bloated, disreputable, and politics driven that awards process is, at least movies are able to agree on a difference between "actually good" and "momentary diversions of no consequence" or "it was fun because my friends were there." Video games require that you have a specific kind of skillset to play them, and board games require that you and your friends have a specific kind of skillset. I think that the broadening of the hobby is good - eventually enough people that are interested in Splendor will get into better games - but the most prolific and high-profile reviewers being mindless champions of whatever they come across definitely doesn't help.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:
My argument is 1. Game consumption is harder than most other media consumption, which means that less people get into them. (and it only needs to be slightly harder for this to be true. Think about how UX design is all about making something slightly easier and how big of an effect it has on buildings.) 2a. Games criticism is as difficult as other types of media because most people won't/can't think about stuff critically. 2b. But, game criticism is currently worse than other types of criticism because it is less popular, so there's a not as many people in that smaller group of "people who play games and want to play just the good ones, thanks." 3. Tom Vasel and SU&SD and other like them aren't experts so much as they are just game pundits. 4. Few people are good at game criticism because of point 1. and point 2. 5. Tom Vasel and SU&SD and the rest are seen as real reviewers and functionally are tastemakers because of 1., 2. and 3. despite how poor their tastes are. 6. That's bad. Obviously there are other influencing factors like the "maturity of the hobby" or whatever but I don't find them that interesting. Videogames are beginning to step out of this with the rise of some much more compelling reviewers (Sarkeesian helped), but they are still basically building a language. Board games will probably take longer because it is harder to achieve what you might call a "critique-able experience." Obviously if you play Tash Kalar once that game will seem much more random than if you play it 20 times. But you only need to play Dead Space all the way through once in order to be able to write about it. I actually think that Let's Plays might be great for videogames because they can demonstrate high-level play to people who might never have the skill or inclination to develop it. High level play in good games is inherently more interesting because of the tenseness and complexity of decision making, and there may likely be more of a willingness to think about "how does this game work when people try to break it."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:Ok, that makes sense. Also I reread my post that you quoted and meant to say "plenty of board games aren't Caylus," in case that wasn't obvious. Whoops. So, my academic background here is in theatre, specifically as a theatre educator. (I perform now, and don't teach, which is probably why I'm getting the urge to poo poo out huge blocks of text on board games.) There's a lot of study that goes into a theatrical text on a the side of performers and everyone else involved in a production. You're right that one of the stated goals of critics is to influence performers - but pretty much any "content creator" on the side of theater with a creative say is likely reading a shitload of texts about whatever production they're doing. It's not just a case of "actors doing homework" it's directors reading old criticism, lighting designers, set designers, prop designers, costume, etc. These people are actually fairly reliant upon criticisms of previous productions as ways to jumpstart their understanding of anything they're doing. Because you can't just read The Lion King if you're doing the stage adaptation of The Lion King. You probably also have to read Hamlet, Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead, some of Shakespeare's other works, rewatch Sleeping Beauty, etc. Critics become immensely useful here because what they've written on Hamlet or Rosencrantz & Guildenstern or w/e likely has a point of view that talks about how these things interrelate, or at least pokes at certain ways of viewing a production that can give another production of The Lion King some additional "heft." So there's content creators. But I (and many of my friends) also listen to critiques about stuff that isn't theater. A good example is Slate's series of podcasts about shows like Better Call Saul. That's an analysis that can highlight interesting facets of a TV show and examine it critically without delving too deeply and runs at about 20 minutes. They have a pretty hefty following and they wind up helping everyone, content creators and simple appreciators alike, to understand the medium and maybe pinpoint why they like the things they like. But, there's also people like, say John Green. Or Extra Credits. These people talk about some things (literature, video games) in an accessible, understandable way. They're not going to delve into an arcane examination of ludological theory, but they will talk at length about accessible things and have huge followings. There's room for games criticism to talk about things that will help you have a good with your friends, to talk about what cultural influences on a work, and to talk about how a game works under the hood. I think what needs to be collected are ways of looking at and examining a game that someone is playing. Having a vocabulary for the kind of thing a game is and does and why it does those things well or poorly would make a huge amount of difference. Dead of Winter is an excellent game for showcasing what happens when a designer wants to do something ('create a cinematic experience') without having any real idea what that would mean in terms of gameplay. We know that the color red conveys one set of moods to the audience, but we don't as fine-tuned an understanding of how worker-placement makes someone feel. Impermanent fucked around with this message at 01:49 on Feb 26, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
As an antidote to that terrible game designer's point of view, I feel like I should mention that Offworld, an Early Access Steam game, is heavily inspired by economic board games like Power Grid. In the company blog the designer writes out the rules to the game in rulebook form.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:That was a really interesting post, thanks. Do you think those voices exist at all in board games currently? Also, have you ever heard people within the industry talk about criticism and the need for it? Man, now that I say that, what even is "the industry" for board games - Games aren't made by big teams with notable money backing them, and indie designers aren't really personalities in the way indie video game people often are. Does board gaming even have a voice beyond lukewarm reviewers? I don't really have any idea how this works for the board game industry. The few people I do know who work in boardgame related stuff, though, do have extensive knowledge what the general goonsensus would consider to be more or less good taste. It's a small sample size, though, and the people I know aren't designers, they're more on the PR side of things. We get a lot of outsider perspective from game designers like that loon we've been talking about, but also games like Hearthstone and Offworld are good examples of digital games being influenced by board games. Hell, RPGs in general are influenced off of gygaxian D&D roots pretty directly. RPGs are also good example of how you can slavishly copy broken rules for literal decades because videogame designers appear to not have a loving clue about game design in general but whatever. For example, why is it taken for granted that units must miss in tactical combat games? Is that good game design, or is it taken for granted as something that 'should' be there? Why is it fun for a unit to arbitrarily fail to do the one thing you've asked it to do in a round? King's Bounty doesn't feature units missing in combat outside of specific cases, and neither does Age of Wonders, but the majority of tactical games feature this. FTL is particularly bad in this case, and is a lot like Firefly the Board Game in terms of its love of randomness. Many runs on hard difficulties will be impossible based on circumstances outside of your control, but it was hailed as a triumph of roguelike design. I think that a lot of this has to do with why people like chance that dicates outcomes in board games, which is that we like gambling and feeling like we "earned" something by rolling well.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Lorini posted:I mentioned this previously and was told that it was 'Civ lite'. Which it's not, but I'm unsure that the thread is ready for videogames that use board game mechanics. StashAugustine posted:Yeah it's not really on-topic but it does seem to be an attempt to make an RTS that feels like an economic board game. (I did whine a little in the other thread that most of the people in the OTC thread were comparing it to Catan and Monopoly.) Yeah it's a bit of a step out of our wheelhouse, I just wanted to mention it because it dovetails with what I've been thinking about with regard to how board game design influence video games and vice versa.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
LMAO this duderino has an entire video dedicated to whining about how combos are too hard. edit: proceeds to describe all games in which execution is important as limited to "shallow and rote" interactions. Sorry, fighting gamers, starcraft scene, MOBA players! Your games are all shallow and rote.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
rchandra posted:Do people still enjoy PR or am I many years too late to get use out of it? People consider it a classic. The beginning moves are pretty much solved now, though, so don't read strategy on it too deeply if you want to uncover them for yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
I went to go see The Odd Couple and halfway through there was a fire and one of the lead actors got tangled in the curtains and died. What I'm saying is, that show sucks. I would recommend no one else try watching The Odd Couple.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
I think that the connection people have between combat and dice rolling is some kind of Stockholm syndrome esque Warhammer inspired brain damage.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
I'll never say no to stores that want to sell Magic cards because everybody has to make a living.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
I have been upsold on Arkham Horror in every single board game store I have entered in the Chicago area. If it weren't for this thread I probably would have a copy of Arkham on my shelf and no other games because I would have immediately concluded that board games are trash.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
They hate it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
Honestly though gently caress you if you're not drafting in the 'gric.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
You may need Plano.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 13:02 |
|
|
Caverna solves the new player problem of Agricola but introduces more AP. However, the mining part of caverna feels so good it's hard to play the gric knowing I won't be able to mine a fish.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2015 21:53
|
|