|
Is there a similar-but-better Scattergories, or is it good enough?
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 08:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 16:28 |
|
|
In the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, I encounter a villain, defeat the villain, and he runs to another location and gets shuffled in to that deck (because there was an available location). Now, in that new location deck, there's a villain and a henchman both. If I defeat the henchman and close the location, I'm supposed to discard everything in that deck, but I notice the villain card is there. Do I just keep the villain there, with the location unclosed (meaning that the location deck is just one card, the villain), or does something different happen?Rutibex posted:Your bro needs Agricola STAT Agricola is the pinnacle of human achievement.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
goodness posted:Is Agricola good 2 player? That might be a fun game to ease my gf into the board game thing. Agricola is a terrible first game. It's a great fourth or fifth game, but you'd be better off with almost anything. Agricola is a phenomenal game, but it's stressful, it's got an enormous amount of "stuff to do" for your turn, and the mechanics are completely nonintuitive to the "roll the dice do what the square says" crowd. Aside from Ticket To Ride and Carcassonne (which are both great), I like Takenoko. It's easy, it's cute (meaning it looks appealing, colorful pandas and bamboo and poo poo, instead of a bunch of tiny colored cubes), and it scales well enough that it's fun to play later on. It has dice rolling, which helps direct people, but it also unfolds nonlinearly, so there's decision making and planning, which preps people for games that remove the direction and random elements. PRADA SLUT fucked around with this message at 03:00 on Dec 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
It is my opinion that anyone trying to introduce someone (friend, spouse, etc) new to board games should select a game with these traits. Remember that these games are meant to get new people in to board games, not represent the pinnacle of game design or competitive viability or whatever. This is coming from the people who think that board game night is playing Monopoly and Yahtzee. Some element of randomness This could be dice rolling, card drawing, or the like. Essentially, there needs to be some element of luck involved. I know most players scoff at randomness, but it's actually a really good equalizer to making new players have a chance to win (or at least, to feel like they're still "in it"). Of course, the better player should be able to outplay a disadvantage (nobody is suggesting Candy Land), but it's a lot easier for new players to gain advantage, and easier for them to mentally displace a loss as bad luck, rather than them not getting some fundamental strategy. Think about how a loss would feel if you've got a Chess Elo of 1100 and you play against Kasparov, versus a loss playing blackjack. New players should feel like they have a way to compete with better players. For the teacher, these games also work well because you can ride your opponent a lot harder and the outcome will be much more even. Some people don't really like the feeling that you're just taking it easy on them, and if they win, it's just because you let them. Clearly defined turn strategy Good starter games should have a very easy, very specific goal for players do do on their turn. While every game has a goal (get the victory points of course, how do you not get it why is your turn taking 10 minutes), new players need guidance on exact course of action that they should do on their turn. For instance, a game like Lords of Waterdeep cuts the difficulty for a new player, since they look at their cards, and say "Oh, I need to accomplish these quests sitting in front of me for points, and to do that, I need to get three orange guys". Suddenly, a board with 20 possible actions on it seems manageable, since they know their goal for the turn is to "get orange guys". Compare that to Caylus, where the player just knows a bunch of things they should do at some point in time, but has no idea what to do at any given turn. Limited options Starter games should either give the player inherently few options, or should be directed enough that they can ignore a large number of options (see above) which don't make sense for their turn. Carcassonne is great because they draw a tile, then figure out where to place that one, single tile. Ticket to Ride is great because they can either draw cards or play cards, and they know that if they need to get from Dallas to Portland, they need to have a certain combination in-hand. Twilight Struggle is a bad starter game because the sheer volume of options, none of which are necessarily clearly better than any other. It's for this reason that I think a game like Ascension is better than a game like Dominion for new players. Ascension offers a "snapshot" strategy, where you play your hand, then look at the offering and draft from it, which changes every turn. Dominion--while a good game--is more of a "what the hell, how many of these drat things do I need and why are there so many piles of them" game. Tactics trumps strategy. Little snowballing Essentially, the early game options you take shouldn't have a large effect on the tempo of the game. For example, in a game like Agricola, one player can make sacrifices early game to be able to do literally three times what another person can do late-game, by having more family members (and more available actions). These risk/reward mechanics are great for games--just not for someone's first experience playing something. It's not fun to feel like someone has such an enormous mechanical advantage that it's not actually possible to catch up. It's a lot easier to look at the board state and go "well, I'm behind in points, but otherwise we are equal in what we can do". Snowballing happens in many games, but the important part is that it doesn't feel hopeless to the "behind" player. You can be behind in Ascension or something but still feel like you can get a handful of good draws and come back (see "randomness", above), much easier than you can be behind four family members and six plowed fields in Agricola and feel like the only chance of winning is if your opponent makes an uncharacteristic series of huge gently caress ups. A great visual style Good starter games generally have more polish. It's a lot easier to attract people to games that look good. Put Takenoko and Castles of Burgundy side by side and figure out which one gets the attention of new players (it's the one with the colorful pictures on the tiles, panda bear, and stackable bamboo chutes, not the one with a bunch of wooden discs and cardboard squares). While this might not have any effect on the game itself, it makes the game look way less intimidating, more tangible, and less abstract. Plus, it will keep peoples interest longer or make them want to pay more attention to what you're trying to explain. You win by winning yourself The opposite to this is winning by making the other person lose. There are a few games in which you can do this and still be "starter" games (King of Tokyo), but in general, you want a game in which players each compete to have the highest score, rather than try to eliminate everyone else from play. Hidden points mechanics can work out well in this sense too, where a player, even if they're behind, can at least feel like they've got some last-minute unaccounted for points that could turn the ending score in their favor. People remember the game of Ticket To Ride or Lords of Waterdeep where they were behind on the board, but just barely squeaked out the victory when all the cards were counted up. Even if it appears hopeless (Well I'm behind 20 points and I've only got 3 cards to their 6), as long as there's still the hope that they could come back is a worthwhile mechanic. PRADA SLUT fucked around with this message at 03:56 on Dec 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
OmegaGoo posted:How do Ascension and Innovation fall on that divide? I've heard people (on this forum) raging at Ascension because they think the mechanic of being able to buy two cards in a row is completely unfair and offers such an insurmountable advantage the entire game is nothing but a coin flip. Of course, notwithstanding that there's just as much chance of something good on the flop as something lovely, and that either player has the exact same chances to have any given card flop. Also ignoring fact that what you can (or can't) acquire has to do with what you've been drafting in your deck all game, and your ability to (or to not) acquire a specific card is dependent exactly what you draw that turn, but I guess all those things aren't considered "random". Just the main deck conspiring against you. I think it's just a different kind of randomness than what people are used to, because it's more visible. It's visible to have your opponent take a card you want before you get a chance to, it's not as visible when you shuffle your deck and you get a lovely draw Dominion because you don't feel like you've lost an opportunity. The takeaway is that some people absolutely despise mechanics that can somehow offer asymmetrical advantage and disadvantage, and perceive it as an unfair mechanic. Some people don't like working under the "good enough" constraints of what you've got to work with that turn, or with a less-than-ideal board. Some people can't stand the idea that their opponent can get something that they will no longer be able to get. PRADA SLUT fucked around with this message at 06:24 on Dec 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 06:15
|
|
|
They're mostly generic games, but Amazon's got some lightning deals tomorrow (west coast time): 6:00 am - Munchkin 5 de-ranged [6.214] ($15.42) 7:00 am - Car Wars [6.055] ($15.14) 8:00 am - Sorry [4.643] ($21.73) 8:00 am - Resistance [7.416] ($14.09) 9:00 am - Boggle jr [5.359] ($14.67) 9:00 am - Rummikub large letter edition [6.135] ($20.71) 9:30 am - 5 Second Rule [5.519] ($25.00) 10:00 am - Hi Ho Cherry-O [4.487] ($6.69) 10:00 am - Clue [5.550] ($17.70) 11:00 am - Scrabble Deluxe [6.291] ($29.56) 11:00 am - Disney Sofia Monopoly Jr [4.407] ($9.95) 12:00 pm - Candy Land Disney Princess Ed. [3.665] ($13.99) 1:00 pm - Sons of Anarchy [6.003] ($30.21) 2:00 pm - Illuminati [6.010] ($23.77) 2:00 pm - Trouble [4.177] ($13.14) 3:00 pm - Chutes and Ladders[3.401] ($9.80) 3:00 pm - Rise of Augustus [6.683] ($23.05) 3:00 pm - Ouija [] ($13.85) 4:00 pm - Spongebob Operation [4.361] ($21.99) 4:00 pm - Nations [7.609] ($46.99) 5:00 pm - Spongebob Monopoly [4.407] ($21.99) 5:00 pm - Disney Planes Chutes & Ladders [3.401] ($15.43) 5:00 pm - Zombie Dice [6.200] ($10.72) 6:00 pm - Zombie Fluxx [6.004] (12.55) 7:00 pm - Eclipse Rise of the Ancients ($30.20) 8:00 pm - Munchkin Cthulu ($18.34) Prices are current BGG prices, not what Amazon will be selling them for, for comparison. Paper Kaiju posted:Ascension's central market deck, however, is 'bad', just as it is in every other game that uses one. It is bad because it does not drive or direct your strategy, it stifles it. Did you choose a rune heavy strategy only to have the central row be nothing by monsters for several straight turns? Or did you go Power-heavy and end up with a dry spell of monsters, forcing you to waste it on lovely Cultists? Oh, you were looking to trim down your deck with banishers, or go for a Mechana synergy strategy, only to never have a chance because they were all drawn after your turn, but acquired before it got back to you? Sucks to be you, dude! That just forces you to play a balanced game. You want to play greedy and throw everything you've got behind one strategy, that's fine, but you risk getting wrecked by something else. If you load up on nothing but power and then a few flops happen where there's nothing to use it on, you can cry about deck RNG conspiring against you, or you can be like "well gently caress, probably should have diversified my deck a bit more the past 5 turns". That's the point of playing tactics is that you don't know what board state you're going to find yourself in, you can either play greedy and go for one strategy only (which will cause you to lose in certain board states), or you can diversify to hedge against other possible board states, at the cost of a less synergistic strategy. It's not that one type of game is better or worse than another, but you can't approach them with the same mindset when you play. In one, things are controlled, things are planned, and it's a very structured, organized outcome. The cards will be the same, you always have the opportunity to get them, and things otherwise remain very constant, which allows you to build some sort of grand architecture of strategy. In another, it's unpredictable what situation you're going to find yourself in turn-to-turn and you have to balance between a greedy and a diversified strategy to put you in the best position for the unknown turns to come. You might have draws in which you want both of, but can only take one, or weighing a card your opponent might want, versus its usefulness to you, or leaving a board in the state that is disadvantageous to your opponent, versus gobbling up every last card you can get. Cocks Cable posted:I can't agree with the choice of Ascension over Dominion based on the criteria that was laid out. Ascension's rotating card offer has got to be more confusing with a constant slew of new choices compared to Dominion's static 10 card selection. Plus Dominion has decent and reliable standbys to purchase (i.e. silver) that grant some progress if you're completely unsure for your turn. Big money is a simple and easy first time strategy (albeit boring). Ascension has like 50+ different cards coming out. It's hard to know what's good and then try introducing the idea of common/uncommon/rare cards. I should clarify why I put Ascension instead of Dominion (though any similar game could work). For a new player, you basically tell them "okay, heres 5 cards. Pick the one(s) you want, that you have the resources for." Each turn the five cards are different, so every turn, they have something new to look at, instead of the same 10 piles of cards that slowly deplete. For one, it cuts the decision-making in half, since they only have to worry about 5 cards (and they don't need to worry about memorizing them or anything since they can just read as they go). It also keeps them from worrying about what sort of balance of multiple cards they need, since once you take a card (aside from the basic resource cards), it's gone from play and a new card replaces it. This also gives the feeling that each persons deck is unique, instead of having them trying to emulate the draws you pick (which happens sometimes.. new players just do whatever they think the person who knows how to play does). Also, the "honor" (point) system gives you points as the game goes on, instead of both players having "zero" points and then getting a giant wad at the end. This makes it easier for people to determine the relative positions of everyone during the game. Imagine Ticket To Ride if there was no scoring of routes in the middle of the game, you just counted up everything at the end instead. It's a lot easier for new players to wrap their heads around a game where you always know who's in first, second, last, etc (even if there are hidden points at the end). I've had far more (brand new) people get drawn to Ascension than I have any other similar card game, as well. The downsides I noticed about Dominion (Thunderstone, etc), was that there was just a bit too much to choose from, and no real way of determining the metric of success. How many points do I have? Who's ahead? Is this the right play? What do I directly gain from this? Again, this is not about which game is "better", or which game is more deep or appealing to "gamers", it's just my rationale for why games with certain mechanics tend to be better at introducing brand new players to the game. I'm not claiming Ascension is the greatest deckbuilder of all time (it isn't), it just happens to be one of the card games with many mechanics that are easy for new players to get in to, though there are others as well that could easily be used instead. PRADA SLUT fucked around with this message at 09:22 on Dec 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 08:36
|
|
|
King of Tokyo, Ticket to Ride, and Carcassonne have enormous RNG-based swings, but people hail those are fantastic introductory games (rightly so, they are). Every game with draw-based objectives (Takenoko, Lords of Waterdeep, Ticket to Ride) has an inherently "unfair" mechanic in which a player can draw cards which they nearly already have the resources to score. You can even just get lovely rolls five turns in a row in Catan and have no plays, or have the dice turn against you in King of Tokyo. Claiming that these "luck-based" situations make these games bad for new players is asinine. Who gives a poo poo if your opponent gets a phenomenal roll in King of Tokyo and knocks you out? I'm not talking about "competitive games that test skill alone and should have their own leagues and Elo rankings", I'm talking about getting your friend/girlfriend/wife into the hobby that you enjoy playing, and picking games that will make them want to play deeper, more complex games with you in the future.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
Is there a website with a "master" list of what sorts of containers fit inside various game boxes? I want to organize some of my pieces a bit more but all I can find are some BGG opinions on which boxes may or may not fit.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=ty_deal...rd_i=2241292011 Amazon year-end sale.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
This weeks Humble Bundle is a bunch of card games: https://www.humblebundle.com Includes Scrolls, Star Realms, Dominion, and Magic 2015
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
If anyone was in to Ascension, but sperged out about THE ART, there was a 3rd edition reprint of the base set with the new art and frames (old card for reference):     They've stuck with the Sabee "sketched" style in the newest set, just like the Apprentice Edition, I guess every set is going to get the treatment it seems. There are a few cards (Wolf Shaman, Spike Vixen) which have been reprinted in Realms Unravelled, so it seems they're doing the MTG thing where they'll reprint and change the art. It's nice though because it makes the newer sets work way better as a standalone set--Realms Unravelled is probably "the" set to buy now if you're looking to break into the game. Note the card backs logo is lighter (same as the Apprentice Edition and Realms Unravelled--looks like they're doing it with all the new sets now), so you'll have to sleeve them if you want to mix-and-match.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
What are the "must-have" expansions for 7 Wonders?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2015 06:14
|
|
|
I know most people here are neckbearded Ascension haters (that game that's like Dominion but better), but the next (8th) expansion was announced. The new mechanic, Dreamborn, gives players an insight token (a currency that carries over at the end of the round) when it flops, as well as one to the acquiring player (and other card effects). With these tokens, players can buy cards from their "dream deck", which they draft at the start. You get 5 dream cards and keep 3 (hidden), and then start the game as normal. Dream cards can be things you acquire to your deck, or one-shot effects. The idea is that it gives you some sort of direction or strategy to aim for at the very start, and lets you keep late-game cards in reserve for later (which would just poo poo up the center row for 10 turns otherwise) They also have a different art style for dream cards, which seemed to be the source of the most bitching about the game. PRADA SLUT fucked around with this message at 07:14 on Oct 6, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:So, they cranked variance TO THE XTREME on Coinflip: The Deckbuilder and you think the chief complaint about the game was the art? See, there are people who are just going to cry about the gameplay no matter what because they hate the idea of having unknowns to work with, and prefer neat little piles of identical cards every single game. Those players will never like Ascension, just like some players will never like Magic because, god forbid, you get bad draws and lose a game occasionally. However, there's a group of people who thought the game was great, but were put off by the original art style, which has changed for various expansions as time went on:    (original / first change / last year / new set)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:It's adorable that you think the gameplay complaints can be summed up by ~hurr durr hidden information~. Magic, this ain't. See, this is what I'm talking about. There are some people that just can't handle the idea that they'll lose an occasional game due to really bad draws, even if they think they did everything absolutely perfectly. There's no way to convince those people that any expansion is going to be fun, so they probably shouldn't even play the game at all. They seem like the kind of people that throw a similar, self-righteous fit if another player gets a fantastic roll and knocks them out of King Of Tokyo.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Andarel posted:The problem with Rise of Vigil was cards like Lifebound Muse and Righteous Templar (and to a lesser extent Tablet of the Dreamer) being extremely swingy at 60-80 because of the distribution of 2-3 energy in your deck possibly giving huge economy swings really early in the game. That's actually one of the points the devs brought up with the new expansion, was they liked the idea of energy mechanic, but not the implementation. They're doing the new mechanic in a way that gives everyone a slow influx of dream tokens, with certain cards in the center row offering an extra one when they're taken. Since dream tokens carry over between turns, you can spend them on a few cheap cards early on, or save them multiple turns for something big down the road, and depending on what you select at the start, some middle row cards will be more or less valuable to different players. 120 honor works fine, but it switches the entire balance of the game around. It's not unbalanced, it's just completely different done. You either have to go heavy trash/draw, or a huge push toward constructs. Bottom Liner posted:I play a lot of Ascension on the iPad, and I think that Dawn of Champions and this new expansion is a step back from the last few. I think the game peaked at Rise of Vigil and Darkness Unleashed, playing with 120 stars. With that setup, RNG was minimized and you could reliably build towards certain engines and capitalize on a certain strategy the majority of the time. The new ones that give you a champion or the draft cards are a cool idea, but then if the corresponding cards don't reveal themselves at the right time you get completely screwed and can't compete with someone that got what fit their preselected stuff. I like DoC, the only thing I don't like, is the chained Rally, even though the probability is fairly low (1/64ish for a triple, considering multifacs and nonfacs). It mentally feels swingy sometimes, but I'd say that it's only actually turned a game about 10% of the time. I actually found more success just playing the game like normal, ignoring your faction bias after you get your hero to your deck, which you'll get really quickly.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
sector_corrector posted:It's a huge piece of poo poo on the PC. Depending on what you're trying to do sometime you have to right click on the card to get to the interaction menu, sometimes you can only drag it, sometimes you just click and it works. Constructs that should automatically generate resources need to be clicked on for some obscure reason. The whole thing is flashy and ugly, with a shitload of unnecessary animations. Dominion.NET is free, and better by miles. The PC version is just an iOS port, considering they're porting a game made for a 4 inch touchscreen to a 24-inch monitor with a mouse. It works flawlessly on iOS. The PC dev team shut down or something happened so they ended up just moving the iOS port over while they write an "actual" PC version. Constructs that do something are clicked on only if it gives you the option to do something. Like you aren't forced to draw a card with The All Seeing Eye, and you might want to wait to draw depending on what you do the rest of your turn. Some constructs effects are forced to activate, so they happen at the start of the turn without your interaction. Card points are worth a lot in some strategies, like Mechana Constructs are 1:1 price:honor, so they give you the greatest return of any single acquisition. Things like Lifebound Heroes are worth more at the start because they generate honor more often when played (and aren't often worth much in the deck), so when the pool is running low, it's often way more valuable to pick up something like a Mechana Construct over a Lifebound Hero, regardless of your deck synergy. Also, since Lifebound tends to deplete the honor pool quicker, if you're playing from behind, you can delay the end of game by just filling your deck up with higher value cards and going for 0 honor turns. Also,  
PRADA SLUT fucked around with this message at 00:48 on Oct 7, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Caedar posted:I started to type a reasoned reply, then realized that there's no possible way you aren't trolling. So in summary: This is dumb. You are dumb. If chess isn't mysogynistic then why does the game end when the KING is captured? Also, why does the queen start boxed in by kings and bishops who hold her back from having any effect until they choose to let her out? Checkmate, egalitarians.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:There's several more categories in it, at least (weird names like Melvin and Vorthos). Lots of people don't seem to know that. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:Oh by the way if anyone tries to pull Rutibex's chess grandmaster poo poo ask them if professional chefs being 95% male all the way up to michelin star level means women just don't like cooking. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Good game design. I'm pretty sure the randomness will help the new players win some of the games and not feel bad when they lose with only 5% of the points of the winner. Given that it takes an 11-card combo to pull off, I'd say it's fine. Bottom Liner posted:Pretty sure that your scenario would be the same as a competitive MtG player busting out a top tier combo deck and walloping someone with a store bought starter deck. That's not a good way to judge the game for either side. Very few games work well with someone that has a lot of experience vs. a new player. Good Ascension players are often racing towards the broken combos and getting their first or denying makes for an interesting game. It's actually a comedy strategy, that's so hilariously ineffective that it took me nearly 20 games against the easiest AI to actually do it. You need a near-unfathomable amount of chance to get every single card you need and to have all the flops work in your favor, and you're guaranteed to lose every single game you don't actually pull it off. So, in essence, a sub-5% chance to actually even have a shot at doing it, and another sub 5% chance to combo the deck off it (every other scenario you lose hard). That is, assuming your opponent doesn't take any of the multiple cards you need to do it, or they don't get removed from the center row (and you're playing with the specific sets they require). Sure, once you pull it off, you just win the game right there, but the circumstances for doing so make it all but worthless in everything other than a "I wonder if this could actually happen". It's like the turn 0 win in Magic that has a 1/205,000 chance of working, and it takes an entire deck built specifically around it. Cards required: 3 Deathdealer Nobles (of 3 total in the deck) 1 Emri the Unmaker (of 1), transformed with 8+ Monsters in the void 1 Dhartha the Eternal (of 1) 2 Oziah's Familiar (of 2) 1 Remus, Pack Guardian (of 1), transformed 1 Daybreak Askara (of 1) 1 Xeron, Lord of Deofol (of 1), defeated by you 1 Adayu the Serene (of 1), transformed from defeating Adayu the Tormented I don't know how to calculate odds of this, but you basically need 11 cards in a deck of 150, of which you need exactly every copy of (so there are no "extra" copies you can give up). Your opponent can't take them, and you can't lose them to the void, in addition to a thin, draw-heavy deck (you need to be able to cycle your entire deck in one turn, but it doesn't matter specifically which cards you use to do it). Copy Adayu with the Askara, which gives you 3x the effect, and have 3 Deathdealer Noble in play. Thus, every Void Hero you play gives you 6 Power. When you defeat a hero with Xeron, you gain its effect like you played it, so defeating a Void Hero in the center gives you 6 power (so a 2-rune void hero would give you a net 4 power, plus whatever its hero ability is). Emri lets you re-kill things in the void you've already killed once, Remus lets you use your runes as power to keep the combo going, and Oziah's Familiars give you 2+ additional honor per Enlightened kill because they kill cultists. Dhartha gives you a free card each time you kill something and it also draws with Adayu, so you can continue to play anything you acquire. Optimally, you clear the entire deck in one go, and the only monsters left are the Sower of Betrayal and Sower of Discontent, which give you 30-60 honor each because you've played so many Void Heroes. If you use Emri you can defeat them multiple times in the void and when they reshuffle, since the deck will be nothing but monsters. PRADA SLUT fucked around with this message at 01:38 on Oct 8, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
The best game mechanic is having tokens that you can stack in such a way to make it look like your pieces are having an orgy.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
I have a copy of Eclipse that's open, but is literally unplayed and is in immaculate shape. What's a fair price for it?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Is this thread literally ever not mad about something? This thread has taught me that nothing enrages goons like saying you enjoy playing (a game they don't like), and that calling a game "random" is like the ultimate board-gamer insult you can use.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Andarel posted:The best part about Ascension dumb combos is that when the game breaks (Adayu the Serene + the guy who lets you kill monsters in the Void) it takes like an hour to take your turn. I had a chance at comboing off a second time but I accidentally hit "play all" which might have cost me ~2000 more VP. The good news is that if this was in person you just start the combo, get ~30 more points than everyone else, and then everyone packs up and does something else. I did some pseudo tests on this, and I think what happens is the game can only initialize so many active cards at a time. Once you get past 100 or so, it ignores older cards in favor of the new ones. For instance, older constructs can't be targeted anymore, older hero effects cease to activate, etc. It has something to do with active cards specifically, because if you mill a 500-card deck out, every banished card is still targetable.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
I'm gonna let the devs slide on the fact that they designed a game engine around a base card set that was supposed to work within the bounds of that set, and couldn't anticipate what the game would be like 8 expansions down the road, what hardware specs it would run on, or even if they would exist still for that. I remember the game being out on the iPhone 3GS--7 phones generations ago. Sure, they should switch their variable handling now, but even Blizzard and Wizards (who have orders of magnitude more money to work with) have bugged interactions in their new game sets. Plus, none if this is actually the case in the physical game itself, it's how the iOS port handles it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Is there any news / expansion / anything in the pipeline for Caverna?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
Andarel posted:The real problem is Adayu the Serene, more than anything else. It singlehandedly breaks many decks and auto wins if you play it with a copy effect. I think it's the draw more than anything. It should be an option to draw/discard, or banish center, or defeat a monster of X or less on Enlightened or something, instead of straight draw. The rest of it is fine (you could do a double resource but a single unite if you wanted), like it's just one extra resource on other factions which is good, but it's also a hero so you don't get the effect nearly as often. Enlightened doesn't have much else than those three mechanics, and any of them would be fine. Constructs limit themselves to 1 activation per turn, but they also allow activation every turn without you having to play them again.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
The best minis game is Agricola with the little sheep
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
TastyLemonDrops posted:Anybody play the Portal board game? Is it a shameless cash grab? The premise seems interesting, and while I'm not a fan of the whole cake meme, it's still a neat concept. Vasel likes it, and it actually seemed like a legit game. You basically have a board with a bunch of tiles that keep moving, and any workers or cake that's on a tile that moves gets destroyed. You try to keep your cake on the board and kill off your opponents, with some cards and other pieces that let you manipulate the game state, move things around, etc. It's been described more like a puzzle game, and apparently it's good as a game itself, theme excluded.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2015 05:24
|
|
|
TastyLemonDrops posted:I ended up purchasing Portal and played it a few times last night. General consensus was extremely positive. It'll be the 4 player filler game that I bring to game nights for the forseeable future. Now, I say filler game, but the game can get really thinky and deep. Our first couple of games were half an hour and ten minutes. Our third took almost an hour; by this time, we had started setting up ridiculous Rube Goldberg designs for victory. How would it theoretically play with 2?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
Looks like CSI just cut prices across the board by about 10%, seems to be their new thing.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
My favorite traitor game is asking this thread for advice on a game to buy.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
Banana Man posted:I have literally no idea what either game does based on the card art, at least RFTG cards are alot cleaner and tighter looking. Thank god they reprinted it with updated art: 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 07:26
|
|
|
I agree, we should only use original themes for board games. *picks up tiny brown cube that represents wood*
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 07:38
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Those cards might be complex compared to the rest of Race for the Galaxy, but they are nowhere near as screwy as cards get from games that use primarily text. For example: 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
Dominion is less interactive because Dominion players are not people I interact with.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
I would play Magic Mike: The Boardgame
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2015 04:13
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:Board game recommendations for a bunch of kids please , oldest is 12, rest are 6 up. King of Tokyo
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 16:28 |
|
|
Morpheus posted:I never want to play a game of Pandemic again. Hear hear
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 17:20
|
|