|
Fat Turkey posted:What am I missing with Quantum? I read the rules. I rolled two 3s and a 4. To win the game I need to lay down all the quantum cubes I have, but the rules say that from the 5 of my colour, that two of them are for bigger games and so I have 3, and I start with one built anyway. This meant I could build the other two quantum cubes within 3 turns (both neighbouring planet were 7) with nothing my opponent could do. Even if he could, it pretty trivial to build two cubes. What rule am I getting wrong here? Number of cubes is based on the board size. Even the smallest set-up has 4 cubes, and that's one of the 4 player ones. For 2 players, the lowest number of cubes is 5.
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 15:48 |
|
|
Countblanc posted:My biggest critique with Roll for the Galaxy is that it ends just when people are getting engines. Like, I know it's strong design to end a game before it turns into people just running their engines, but the necessary number of points in Roll needed to end the game seems a bit too low. Which fortunately is easily fixed by simply requiring a few more, but yeah. Has anyone ever seen the game end from the "build 12 things" condition instead of the "exhaust [points based on player count]" one? Last time I played someone hit 12 and few other people were close.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
I have a couple friends that host a weekly gaming group, and twice a year they do an all-weekend kind of thing where we get some catered food, prizes, etc. It's really cool of them to do, but sadly I find myself GMing quite a bit, because most of the other people have bad taste in games (great people though). It's not for a few weeks, so I've got some time to brush up on rules and such, but my plan is thus: Friday night: Kemet, Cyclades: Titans Saturday morning: Keyflower Saturday night: Samurai Spirit, Bunnyx2 Moosex2, Cutthroat Caverns (a lot of the people like Munchkin for some stupid reason, so I'm gonna try and convert them to a better version of it) Sunday: Archipelago I really wanted to do Mage Knight on one of the days, but I've only actually managed to play once, and I'm not sure that a few weeks is will have enough free time to refresh myself on the rules completely. Also I don't have much time during that weekend where I'm *not* teaching, but that's better than having to play Sentinels. I also had a chance to play Xia for the first time. I may play it again, if only to convince the owner that it's easily breakable. We played the "beginner" version, only going to 10 points and no NPCs. I lost by one point, and I got that far simply by going back and forth between two space the entire game and rolling lots of d20's. Pretty much everyone except the owner of the game had a miserable time. I was not a huge fan of Merchants and Marauders when I played it (but I'm willing to give it another shot), and this piece of poo poo is 10x worse at everything it does. I don't often get actually angry at games, but Xia tested my limits. There's so much design space for a space exploration and trading type game, and Xia fails so horribly at everything aside from the above-average components.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2015 14:51
|
|
|
BL, how come there isn't a kickstarter level for retail stores to get multiple copies of Final Attack? My FLGS regularly donates to KS games if they know they can get multiple copies to sell.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
Broken Loose posted:edit 2: it's live. Awesome, I'll let my local store know about it the next time I'm in (probably within the next week or so).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
I had Aquasphere in my hand yesterday but passed on it. My store also had Mythopia and Deus in stock, but I haven't really read much about either. They also had Northwest Passage, which I vaguely recall reading about a long time ago when it was in development. I wonder if the final product turned out any good.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
BonHair posted:What's the consensus on Istanbul? I really really like Istanbul. It can be a little intimidating to new players since there is a decent amount of information front-loaded, but the iconography is pretty intuitive.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
Alright BL, I name-dropped Final Attack! on the discussion on SU&SD today. Didn't link it because I think they have rules against that. Maybe they'll mention it next week. Also congrats on getting half-way to funded!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:lol @ the two 'original idea, do not steal' guys Honestly I don't think that it should discourage people from making games with similar themes. I'd rather see 10 new giant robot board games come out instead of another dumb zombie game.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
Anyone had a chance to play Onward To Venus yet? The box art is quite compelling, even though I'm not a huge fan of alternate history type stuff. The description on the back seemed alright, but I'm a little gun shy of sci-fi board games because there are so many stinkers out there. I ended up buying Hawaii instead because I like Tiki-related things. Hopefully I'll have a chance to play this weekend.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2015 13:23
|
|
|
The ability to look at games in a critical light has turned me into "that guy" and I need to learn how to enjoy myself during bad games. We have a regular group of people that gets together on Wednesday evening, and they're all good folks. Super friendly, willing to try new games, but a few tend to get stuck in ruts and will cycle through the same 3 or 4 games week after week. Also the group as a whole doesn't seem to be able to differentiate between good and bad games, leading to people being just as enthusiastic about Dungeon Lords as they are with Red Dragon Inn. This week, half the group played a rather lengthy game of Legacy: Gears of Time (which I actually kinda liked the first time I played), and the rest of us played Alhambra. This was my second time playing Alhambra, and I really enjoy it, though I do think that the expansion with the diamond cards might be a little bit overpowered. What worried me the most is that some of the other people didn't really get why I was paying such close attention to their boards and counting tiles towards the end of the game. The whole point of the game is to have more tiles in each color than your opponents, and it says right on the player board how many of each color there is. So yeah, it's kinda really important to pay attention to how many of each color is left so you can plan accordingly. These aren't dumb people I'm playing with, but it made me think that they're just blindly moving towards the end of the game, vaguely aware of what the scoring conditions are. Anyways, after that was a quick game of Sushi Go which isn't amazing, but is fast and cute and perfectly acceptable as a filler game. Then, it was decided that we were gonna play a 4 player game of Castellan, and things started to go south. In this game, you play cards from your hand, take the bits of castle that are indicated on the card, and try to add those bits on to a central castle, forming enclosed spaces that you can then claim for points. I really believe that this should only be played as a 2-player game, despite the fact that it is suggested that buying two copies with different colors will allow you to play 4. The game dragged out well past what it should have, and it's rather difficult to plan your turn in advance as each player is changing the layout of the castle during their turn. Also, no matter how many cards you play, you only draw 1 at the end of your turn, unless you played a card that allows you to draw an extra one. Of course, if you got one of these "draw an extra" cards on the bottom of your deck, it does you absolutely no good. It's not a good game, and it has questionable design decisions, but the most frustrating part to me is that it had the *potential* to be a good light filler game. It was pretty obvious that we weren't having a good time with it by about midway through, but apparently it really showed on my face or in my voice, because I was accused of being a sourpuss afterwards. That I should enjoy the company and be happy to spend time with them, rather than worrying about the quality of the game. This seems absurd to me. There's plenty of awesome games out there that I can "enjoy the company" as well as enjoy the game itself. I've been trying to keep myself "in check" the past few months, too. I try to limit any criticism I have, I've stopped making comments that could be viewed as "negative" towards some of the games that are regularly played. I've been trying to keep an open mind and be willing to try out games that I know are going to be bad. And I've really stopped trying to help them understand the difference between good and bad games. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. But I'm willing to, painfully, acknowledge that maybe it *is* me that is the problem. Maybe I just am a game snob and I'm turning into someone that I myself wouldn't want to play a game with.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:Channel A is a A2A/CAH type game that is less 2edgy, more conducive to creativity, and generally more entertaining. The rotating producer role picks two premises from a drawn hand of five and then the rest of the table uses their hand of words to invent a show/movie title and deliver a pitch. The winner is determined by voting. That actually sounds like a kind of clever party game.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2015 07:21
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:It is because it formalizes the part of games like Apples to Apples where people try to (with varying degrees of slyness) sell the judge on their idea and turns it into a core aspect of play. It's not just enough to lay down some cards with words in a clever combination, you have to actually explain what your goofy anime show is about and how it ties into the producer's chosen concepts. Oh, it's for anime. Are there other versions out there? I don't think my group would really go for that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
Rubitex is secretly SuperMechaGodzilla.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
Mojo Jojo posted:I may have already asked this here, but has anybody got any experience with Homeland? It sounds right up my alley ( a game based around BSG-style crisis decks) but the company behind it seem to have a reputation for shovelware - such as the generally slammed Firefly boardgame. I've never seen the show but the game did look kinda interesting. I share the same fears regarding the company, but they also made that Spartacus game that garnered some praise. For me at least, it sounds like one that I'd have to try before I buy.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
Is it really rules-heavy? I thought it was just essentially Pictionary with the playing field leveled by having outrageously hard things to draw.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Only ones I didn't get were Brass and War of the Ring. Not sure if I should be proud or ashamed.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
Bruceski posted:Red Dragon Inn is a fine silly game for 2-4 people if you keep things moving. Unfortunately everyone insists on playing it with whoever's in the room even if that's upwards of 10 people. It's got the Munchkin problem of "everybody's playing cards on other people's turns and tend to dogpile whoever's in the lead" so if you don't keep it small things become a slog. I'm loath to even suggest four players, it really does explode quickly. It's one of the few games in my history that I had to outright just quit playing half-way through. And I've played a fair amount of terrible games.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Ahhh. That's kind of how I feel about 'Gric, actually, so that's interesting -- in terms of it feeling a little point salady and feeling like a semi-interactive puzzle.The goals in Terra Mystica for each round seem like they ought to spice that up a bit, but yeah, I can see the criticism of it feeling a little bit puzzle-ish and having very subtle interaction but I feel that it's no more so than 'Gric. Maybe give it another shot. Terra Mystica gets better after the first few plays, when you realize that what race you choose is actually really important, not only in relation to the round bonuses, but also in relation to what races other players have picked.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 07:02
|
|
|
tarbrush posted:Off to do the Watch the Skies 2 megagame as featured in SU&SD tomorrow. Pretty fuckin' excited That looked like a blast.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:That's basically why I didn't buy it. I'm not sure who would actually enjoy it and while I like the crazy ideas in it, it does look like a bunch of parts that wouldn't stick together quite right. B2M2 is a lot of silly fun and is an excellent replacement for dumb party games. I've had great success teaching it to people that don't play many games, and people that are used to playing simple games like Munchkin.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
PRADA SLUT posted:What are the "must-have" expansions for 7 Wonders? Personally, Leaders is a must-have because it gives you something to work towards straight from the beginning. I like Cities as well, and would recommend it. The set of extra boards is alright, but I'd stop short of Babel. If you add in Babel after Leaders and Cities, it just becomes too much.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
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. Except that it generates lukewarm to horrible experiences and can't decide if it wants to be taken seriously, seriously with gallows humor, or just outright absurdly. At least with something like Arabian Nights I know what I'm getting into from the get-go.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 15:40
|
|
|
Texibus posted:So much hate on ole man Dead Winter, I found it entertaining when I played it. Little bit long but by no means a bad game. What aspects of it are well-designed in your opinion, and why?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
The End posted:http://www.shutupandsitdown.com/blog/post/review-panamax/ I still watch all their reviews, but I'm to the point where the only ones I look forward to are the ones with Paul in them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2015 03:22
|
|
|
Blamestorm posted:Any opinions on Panamax? I'm a sucker for economic games and it looks pretty good! Shut Up and Sit Down just did a pretty spot-on review of it. The only thing I felt they left out was that the end-game scoring cards don't seem to be very well balanced. Also the rulebook is seriously a horrible piece of garbage.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2015 06:14
|
|
|
Gutter Owl posted:So, boardgoons. We can mostly agree that Vlaada Chvatil (praise be unto him) is the living gift of the heavens, sent to the Czech Republic as a divine apology for both Monopoly and communism. We can all recite the holy canon at the unbelievers: Through the Ages, Galaxy Trucker, Space Alert, Dungeon Lords, Dungeon Petz, Mage Knight, Pictomania, drink. I own Travel Blog and it was ok, but I've honestly only played it maybe twice. On the other hand, if you don't enjoy Bunny Bunny Moose Moose than you probably have no soul.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:News flash, Tek has no soul wait we knew that already. Which is odd because I'm fairly certain I've agreed with him on a fair number of other games/issues.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Looselybased posted:I bought Dogs of War based off the SUSD review and it is awesome. Really really digging it. Interesting decisions everywhere and a little politicking for spice. Have you, by chance, played Blood Bowl Team Manager? After going through the SUSD review it looked like it had some similar mechanics and I was hoping to get a comparison by someone who's played both.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2015 03:12
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:I played Roll for the Galaxy last night and really enjoyed it. Am I crazy? I think I'm the lone dissenter in the thread that doesn't enjoy Roll. I love Race, and it just seems like a far more elegant game than Roll. I found it to be a bit fiddly and very very slow to start out. I also didn't like that they didn't include enough tiles to give everyone a "draw two and pick one" for your starting planets. I figured that they would have learned from Race on that issue, since the expansions addressed it and made the game much more enjoyable. Don't get me wrong, I'm not completely panning it. I think it's actually pretty decent for a dice game, I just think it's a step down from playing the original.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
I'm not an expert, but those Wizard Academy minis looks pretty inoffensive to me. The Kingdom Death ones are hilariously offensive though.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
That chart is freaking amazing. But Archipelago is a traitor game and a lot of the tension in it is drawn from figuring out if there actually is a traitor or if you're all just being greedy dicks.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
I just got back from a friend's birthday party. He has, at times, questionable taste in games, but about half of his collection is acceptable. There were about 6 of us looking to play a game, so he decided to grab a few more people from the party and bust out his personal favorite, Duel of Ages 2. Neither my GF or I had ever played or heard of this game, so we both agreed to give it a shot. I'm still trying to decide of this game is the worst dumpsterfire ever printed on cardboard, or some elaborate hoax/ruse that is the most convincing satire ever (to the point where people on BGG legitimately discuss things such as rules questions and game cards, all of them in on the same joke to confuse people like me). There are few games that I actively hate, and fewer still that I consider to be worse than Munchkin, however Duel of Ages 2 made me want to kill myself in ways that I had never imagined. Normally I'd describe a bit of the game and my experience, but instead I'll just say avoid this game at all costs. There is no enjoyment to be had by any sane person, and I am now convinced that my friend has no ability to discern bad games from good.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2015 04:14
|
|
|
4outof5 posted:shut your filthy hole do not compare the greatness of duel of ages 2 to beta version of star realms. What is the appeal of DoA2? It can't be the art, story, mechanics, or horrible writing. It's 2 hours of my life, plus explanation, that I will never get back. While playing, I thought it was bad that neither of my pieces had even entered the board till 40 minutes into the game, however upon reflection I think that may have been a blessing in disguise. I actually managed to avoid the completely random outcome determination system that was devised for the sole purpose of being able to brag about being diceless.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
2 player Race is really good.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
al-azad posted:Pretty sure this will never happen. You always know the risk associated with an action and the option to ignore it. This is actually one of my major beefs with the crossroads cards and is yet another reason they feel like a wasted opportunity. If you're going to have a bunch of other dumb randomness in your awful zombie game, why not just go hog wild and not tell people the outcomes of their decisions beforehand. Also make all of those decisions more interesting than "Option A: Risk/Reward. Option B: Nothing Happens". If I'm going to play a zombie game with randomness in it, at least have it serve a purpose. Like, imagine a game where you're all trying to escape some compound that's infested with zombies, but along the way you have opportunities to help other people, etc. You get something like karma points or whatever for helping them, but it slows you down. The game ends when the first person escapes, however then some random mechanic determines how much each karma point is worth, so people who are furthest behind might actually win because they "did the right thing". I dunno, maybe that's a little too on-the-nose for most gamer tastes.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
al-azad posted:
On the contrary, it's *exactly* what zombie infestations are all about. It's about weighing individual survival versus having morals (but probably getting killed as a result). However, there's a very real chance that those morals meant nothing in the end. Maybe your good deeds count for a lot in the "afterlife", thus winning you the game. But maybe there is no afterlife and you should have been a greedy rear end in a top hat the whole time. Unfortunately there's no way of telling till the game is over. Like I said, probably a little too on-the-nose to actually put in a game. I'm not sure I could bring myself to make a game that was *that* arbitrary, but it's at least fun as a discussion generator.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
For Knizia, I like Ingenious. Simple, devious, abstract.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
Magnetic North posted:I'm just familiar with the rules thanks to Table Top heh
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 15:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 15:48 |
|
|
StashAugustine posted:He's drinking a pina colada at Trader Vick's Trader Vic's Which so happens to be one of my favorite restaurants ever. Crab rangoon there is amazing.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2015 07:07
|
|