|
ambushsabre posted:I played Warhammer Diskwars once and now all I want to do is play again. This man has seen the light.
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2014 16:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 23:04 |
|
|
I'd humbly suggest plugging http://www.boardgaming-online.com/, even if admittedly it's a trick to make people play TTA.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
I think Claustrophobia made some clever use of dice, too.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Claustrophobia is in my pile of "games I like but never play and should probably get rid of but they're just a little too good". This is a pretty accurate description of this game. Really wish they made a sequel with juuust a bit more meat to it. Also, a paragraph on 99% zombie games sucking could be nice in OP, as these are blatant cash grabs for unwary board newbies.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
electrigger posted:One, shooting seems like for lack of a better phrase: a crapshoot. Either you make good rolls and you manage to snipe key units off the board and secure a good position, or you roll bad and don't. One thing that really helped me step up my elf game is realising that the ranged troops (maybe except for the dwarven ones) are meant to support melee damage-dealers rather than mop up poo poo on their own. Rolling to kill is rather hard, unless you're aiming at some puny 3 toughness cavalry, but getting a hit at all is rather dependable and very often those 2-3 damage points are all you need for melee/impact troops to finish the enemy on their own. Getting a critical and stopping a bloodthirster is just gravy. Also, don't treat medium range units as ranged troops, you can't really control area with them, just stick them right behind the frontline as a close combat support.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2014 12:12
|
|
|
Probably the fact it looks really, really stupid and it's somewhat hard to convince people to take it seriously.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2014 14:21
|
|
|
I got myself Lagoon: Land of the Druids for Christmas. Saw it has a solo bot option, and gave it a go. drat fine game, despite having little in terms of wow factor (notwithstanding beautiful artwork ). It just simmers in a calm, cerebral way. The gist of the game is that you have a bunch of dudes running around, laying down and ripping apart (for scoring) tiles in one of three colors. It has that cool Pax Porfiriana thing where players manipulate the game to define what actually counts as VPs (in this case, decided by the majority color of the remaining tiles). The meat of the game lies in various abilities that the tiles provide to your dudes. The thing is, about 80% of them are really unexciting. Most red ones allow you to move dudes more efficiently, yellow ones to refresh them (usually to do something after they moved) and blue ones to move tiles around to make shortcuts. So it seems like a one big movement puzzle with a lot of roundabout ways to do the same poo poo. I knew I was missing something about the potentially cool combos this game was supposed to be about - and felt there was little reason to bother with the blue tiles, as compared to the other options. The thing clicked for me on a playthrough where the AI semi-randomly put itself in a killer position, bursting with ridiculous amounts of blue energy (necessary to score the yellow tiles), ready to obliterate everything in the path of the great blue blob waaay faster than I could keep up with. I took a look at my options and it dawned on me that the true utility of tile-moving is to create gamestate blocking the potential targets (the game has a Hive-style rule, where all the tiles must form a single blob) and undoing it the second you are ready to score them. Similarly, when I started to carefully move stuff around, rather than just spawn dudes and have them run at targets to score, more opportunities appeared where re-activating an effect referring to a particular tile is no less useful than moving and scoring a tile with a single pawn. What I'm trying to say is that the combo puzzle is really cool, but there's little in terms of flashy Timmy plays. It's more about clever little maneuvers. I guess it's telling I can't really frame it in an interesting way, but it feels good. Also, the solo rules are very good, which is doubly nice because it is a game suited for just sitting down and spergin' about ekeing out optimal plays, providing a combo puzzle that shifts each turn. The bot is simple to manage and hits the sweet spot between uncertainty and manageability. It apparently also scales in difficulty quite a bit, but I can't really comment on that. Pros: being a cool game. Elegant design. Feels very fluid, in a good way. Cons: about as thematic as Tash-Kalar. Do not buy if you live in AP Danger Zone.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
One thing I find slightly strange about (original) Munchkin's theme is that it attracts a lot of casual gamers that never actually played D&D or its ilk. I mean, people whose sole contact with assorted nerdery is liking a fantasy show on TV and perhaps having played a Bioware game once upon a time suddenly become experts on RPG in-jokes. What I'm trying to say is that Munchkin is literally the Big Bang Theory of boardgaming.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Regarding Tash Khalar, how high the skill ceiling is? I've only played a couple of times, but for the life of me I cannot imagine being able to disrupt my oponent enough to prevent a summoning, especially with the help of a flare. You don't really have to be super aware of particular cards (though you'll learn them along the way anyway). The very sense of lots of pieces blobbing = summoning danger can get you a long way. It's also rather easy to sense someone is trying hard to do some sort of Legendary pattern when he jumps through hoops to place heroic pieces in various places. Lastly, when both playing Imperial decks, you'll have the cards you played so far in some sort of subconscious medium-term memory and will be able to spot these patterns brewing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
You're going about it the wrong way. As a somewhat experienced wargamer I can tell you you're meant to buy the grog no matter what and open it once every few months to fiddle with components thinking how cool would it be if there was someone else to ever play it with. And then soothe the pain by buying another spergy game that won't ever see play. If you happen to live alone (i.e. no prying eyes), there's also the option of playing it solo, crying.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Got a few proper, three player games of Lagoon. None of them with my regular gaming group, but rather light-to-medium euro crowd. I've warned people that it's rather mentally exhausting, but it still piqued interest due to prettiness. It was, surprisingly, received very well and described as "good, but difficult" (as in, strategy rather than rules-wise). The fluidity of the shifting board was praised as a fun element. Myself, I appreciated that the less experienced players could successfully gang up on me in a non-bullshit way (i.e. while pursuing their own strategy).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2014 09:25
|
|
|
taser rates posted:Space Alert This. The best part is that you can lie through your teeth to hesitant people by saying "come on, a game is just 10 minutes flat". No one will call you out on this afterwards, because they'll be busy having fun.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2014 11:39
|
|
|
Partially restricted communication sucks, because it invites endless arguments about what is acceptable communication and what is borderline cheating. Including the numerous cases of "someone thought of a clever way of communicating something once and it kinda stuck and should we now pretend humans are incapable of winking with their right eye because it breaks the challenge". Like, when playing Concept, I described one of James Bond's aspects as woman + wind + heart, which was quite obviously a raunchy phrase in  , perhaps similar to english "to blow somebody", except referring to sex in general. This was pretty funny and a good play, but it soon became obvious it's now the single best, obvious way to phrase "sex" in the game afterwards. Which kinda sucked for the gameplay.[edit] The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Games > Traditional Games > Board Game Thread 4e: I ruined sex for everyone Lichtenstein fucked around with this message at 14:28 on Dec 29, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2014 14:20
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:This is why I don't like chess. We're just supposed to pretend you can only move one piece at a time? Like human beings only have one hand or something? I'm not sure whether you were aiming at missing the point, or being unfunny. The example you gave is a very clear, strict rule: you can unambiguously how many pieces were moved and any incorrectness can be pointed out in objective manner. Limited communication, however, is one big grey zone as the limitations - which are the heart of the gameplay - are infinitely bendable, as working around them is the gameplay. Lack of clear distinctions leads to abuse - either innocuous, by reusing old signals, or doing some straight up retarded yet technically legal poo poo, like Jedit's mathematical system from the previous thread. Sustaining the quality of gameplay requires the players to self-police by making judgements what is and what isn't metagaming with little to no basis in the rules themselves. There are games that pull off limited communication, by providing specific, clear limitations, such as time frame (Tragedy Looper), or clearly defined forms of communication (Pictomania). Games such as Hanabi or Battlestar Galactica* rely on participating player goodwill, which in my humble opinion does not work, as within their systems the grey area between legal and not is oftentimes reached even when playing honestly and in good faith. * I'm thinking of the somewhat fuzzy rules regarding skill cards secrecy.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
Legacy: The Testament of Duke of Crecy is color blindness simulator. This random BGG photo is cheating a bit because of the blur, but Trzewiczek somehow got a great idea of having a white and a cream player in the same game. Also, somewhat similar blues were used, but it's not nearly as funny.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
Had any goons had some experience with Assault on Doomrock? It seems to have a few nice ideas, but then again it seems to have the same old tired fantasy humor as certain game this thread does not appreciate and I'm conditioned to instinctively distrust games.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
Coup. It's simple to learn and you will feel emotions while playing, unlike TTR.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
I guess I must live in a hive of scum and villainy, then. Apart from one dud where people literally couldn't comprehend the cards ( ) it always clicked after the first teaching round. The only slightly confusing thing I always point out is the subtleties of challenging versus Assasin.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
So, uh, what's the proper way to seriously play Ticket to Ride? I mean, I'm not a big fan of ultra-light euros and only really play it when forced by a swarm of newbies at my friends house, mostly by waiting for a beer to cool and mindlessly popping down trains. I get how one could treat, say, Carcassone more seriously by engaging in a vicious blocking game and shrewd min/maxing of controlled territory. TTR, not so much. I mean, you can kinda block someone sometimes when he telegraphs his route strongly and the stars align, maybe there's a possibility for some card denial? Still, the blocking potential in this game feels rather toothless most of the time. The friend who owns the game and has played it a lot with family has a surprisingly effective habit of drawing new objectives like a madman in mid/late game, under assumption it's easy to find something that's accidentally completed or requires little effort to complete, outweighting dead draws. So, please tell me about proper strategy pro players of illegal street TTR use to get all the chicks.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2015 12:18
|
|
|
Power Player posted:I'm trying to remember the name of a board game RPS once talked about but I cannot for the life of me find it or remember the name. It takes place during World War 2, and one player controls the guards wondering around a compound while the other controls a team of commandos trying to break in and complete an objective. It is NOT Incursion, it has more in line with The Dirty Dozen then sci-fi stuff or whatever. Hour of Glory: Stronghold Kit?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:The hearing-impaired player has a legitimate excuse, but the others are dumb and lame and hate fun. He does not. The app shows text messages. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
Re: SUSD Frankly, I never considered them a proper consumer review source, partly because of general taste discrepancy (in a legit way, they want to introduce hobby to newcomers, I want to sperg about panzer divisions) and partly because of them never really being right. I mean, in their old-site days I had a strong feeling about them being sort of newcomers themselves, quite excited about whatever and not too well versed in general gaming back catalogue, "purer" examples of a genre they're talking about (can't really find a good episode list to give some particular examples right now). But, you know, that was okay - their advice was good enough for newcomers, presentation was attractive and oftentimes funny and their enthusiasm had a very sincere vibe to it. I feel that after changing the sites and the format in general the quality of the critique improved a bit, with Quinn's mellowing out a bit and not jizzing himself whenever he discovered a new genre. Then it sort of slippery-sloped into their own biases creeping into the forefront. 2nd Sci-Fi Special aside, for me there were three reviews that proved SUSD to be a bit of stubborn asses, incapable of admitting they might have made a mistake. In no particular order: - A Few Acres of Snow, and the stubborn insistence Halifax Hammer is but a mystique strategy for alpha nerds. - Warhammer: Diskwars - they liked ideas behind it, didn't like the execution. Fair enough. However, when it was pointed out to them they played the game wrong (in a major way) they quickly whipped up a rebuttal saying how it totally doesn't change a thing and they just happened to be right anyway. It had a very childish butthurt vibe to it, not dissimilar to how Tom Vasel speaks in his negative reviews. - Star Wars: The Card Game - Quinn's wasn't thrilled enough by it enough to consider it worth investment. Again, fair enough. However, with him being on a major Netrunner binge it turned into a hilarious excercise in hypocrisy. For example, Quinns made a big passionate rant about how LCGs are corporate soulless cash grabs and everybody should play non-collectible board games instead, but at the same time kept writing Netrunner is totally legit out of the gate and the expansions are there only if you happen to want them. Also lambasted the game for being incomprehensible sudden death trap without perfect cardpool knowledge... as compared to totally legit Netrunner (  ), probably the single most newbie-unfriendly LCG out there.Also, Matt Thrower prefers One Night Ultimate Werewolf to Resistance and Mascarade to Coup, so he's scientifically proven to be a poopyhead.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2015 13:05
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I don't think there is a 'best game ever' There is. Space Alert. It's just that not everyone is best gamer ever.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2015 17:00
|
|
|
Lorini posted:I have a player who learns a million times better from a player aid or other piece of paper that he can refer to. Many times the rules include information that I print out for everyone, this can really speed up the game. Myself, I tend to hide player aids until I'm done explaining. In my experience people tend to zone out when given something with text, reading poo poo that was already explained/is pointlessly out of order and then complain about totally not being told crucial info, because they were busy reading.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:This is incredibly funny to me because both me and Broken Loose think that Mage Knight has serious, serious issues. But keep tooting that horn. silvergoose posted:I mean, just last week BL basically said he hates TtA because it's a single deck game where you can get completely screwed early and have to play it out, which all of us who love the game completely agreed with. Rutibex, the Scourge of God, has brought the dark age upon us.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Talisman with Nickelback.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
When playing Cards Against Humanity https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0D9FJLIJhc
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
If we're laughing at Quinns anyway:SUSD posted:I trust The Dice Tower
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
I raise you https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW8LPgv4NK0
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
Frankly, my main balancing beef with Blood Bowl is the supremacy of Block and Dodge, making a lot of level ups revolve around them or dealing with them, forcing one to grind superstar players to have a shot at abilities that do something interesting (unless one feels really yolo). This is probably the number one factor for me getting burned out on it every once in a while. Blood Bowl has a whole slew of issues (as evidenced by this thread), but I wouldn't really call it a bad game, rather a really dated one. Wish there would be a proper modern successor*. * A kind I can buy in a loving shop, rather than gambling on the Internet for it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
Kasonic posted:I own quite a few games but I'd like to buy Carcassone, something I have no experience with. A need a new game that I can play with non-gamers. Problem is I'm not sure where to start. As far as expansions go, Inns & Cathedrals is pretty much considered an integral part of a base game. Traders & Builders is also regarded highly. You can get one or both of these before even bothering with the base game on it's own. The other expansions range from "spicing the game up for fans" to "really dumb. Don't bother with them until you know you desire them for one reason or another. As for the new tilesets, just check if the two expansions I named are compatible with it, you'll never need anything more to play with the grandma or whoever.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
jmzero posted:Also, any thoughts on Concept? The premise sounds clear enough, but I can't really picture how it actually plays and whether that makes for a fun game. Thoughts? It's a decent variant of charades. Not really a game, though - the scoring system is really dumb and seems thrown in just because "cardboard activity" isn't something one can sell. It won't blow your mind or anything, but if you like charades you'll probably enjoy it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
Der Shovel posted:Like Gimnbo below you said, Cutthroat Caverns is the game to get if you want Munchkin but don't want, you know, Munchkin. It kinda overstays its welcome by ~20 minutes (imo) and the card layout gives zero thought to how they'll be actually used, but other than that it's a stellar Good Munchkin. It also has a boring theme* and is surprisingly awkward to explain for honestly rather straightforward gameplay, but just shut up, suck it up and play it. * If you're a boring dumb baby. Sadly, a lot of people are boring dumb babies.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2015 13:05
|
|
|
I honestly like watching Vasel's reviews once in a while, if I hear he disliked a game. He's got this wonderfully kindergarten-y whiny way of speaking about things he dislikes. That oftentimes his critique also remains on the kindergarten level only increases the amusement. It probably isn't much different than a million whining fat nerds one can find on youtube, but there's certain something about Vasel being childish that I find more funny than annoying. My favourite is probably the Chaos in the Old World review, which is literally 12 minutes 50 seconds of two fat dudes repeating "I guess the game is good, probably, but I really don't like the theme, so I don't know, this is our review I guess." That meltdown where he destroyed some boring eurogame while whining and making snide remarks, because he was so pissed that some bgg dudes dared to disagree with his critique (which basically amounted to "idk , this is some boring euro poo poo", which to give him his due seemed like a fairly accurate description) was also pretty funny.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2015 13:52
|
|
|
Hey guys, if anyone is going to throw Broken Loose $500+, we need to make Rutibex star in his game.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
echoMateria posted:Rahdo loves real time games and since he was a video game designer (and doesn't have some weird bias about some styles of cartoons unlike some people) would also get into the theme. Though I wonder how and if FA! would scale to 2. He and Jen wasn't able to play SA with 2, so it isn't amongst their favorites. Out of curiosity, what did he work on? I jizzed my pants when I found out Vlaada was the designer behind Original War.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2015 09:42
|
|
|
Tevery Best posted:*this term may or may not be present in the English version of the game I believe the English term is boho-chic. After accidentally stumbling into a boho trade fair last weekend I still have no idea what it is. Something hipster probably, as there were Mona Lisa socks for sale. [edit] Also the story is a shameful lie. We sat in the corridor.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2015 12:05
|
|
|
It's rude to play with your phone when gaming.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2015 12:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 23:04 |
|
|
Do those guys have any claim to fame in France, or are they just random dudes with a good camera?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2015 10:34
|
|