|
nimby posted:Some picks may have been for the memes.
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 22:53 |
|
|
Tekopo posted:Picking bad games, but ironically Only Zendo! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 21:20
|
|
|
nimby posted:Only Zendo! My disappointment is immeasurable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 21:26
|
|
|
Zendo a clear winner in the best-game-drafted informal poll. No other option comes close!
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 21:36
|
|
|
Memnaelar posted:Zendo a clear winner in the best-game-drafted informal poll. No other option comes close! How much ballot stuffing did you do?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 21:38
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:How much ballot stuffing did you do? I only get the one vote. Go make your voice heard!
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 21:47
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:How much ballot stuffing did you do? Someone didn't read the poll
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 22:02
|
|
|
blackmongoose posted:Someone didn't read the poll SHHHHHHH
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 22:06
|
|
|
If you didn’t leave that field blank your whole ballot is invalid
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 22:11
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:If you didn’t leave that field blank your whole ballot is invalid Abstaining any question is the same as abdicating any say.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
Suddenly Susan posted:Tragedy Looper -Stupid choice -25 points Your opinion is officially irrelevant. EDIT: Wow can't believe silvergoose got stiffed on the JP import category on the straw poll with both Shogi and Riichi in his lineup. I call foul play. I voted for BL not because i give a poo poo about nosoku dice but because you'd probably be better off importing Tragedy Looper and translating it by hand than relying on ZMan's localization. EDIT EDIT: gently caress WAIT mongoose picked loops, not BL, gently caress DAMMIT. sorry dogcop, pizza clearly trumps dice but i slipped. gutterdaughter fucked around with this message at 00:09 on Aug 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 23:10
|
|
|
I’ll take all of the “I don’t give a poo poo votes” thank you very much
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 23:30
|
|
|
Who do I vote for if all of the drafters have crappy lineups though? This is like sophie's choice NB: some lineups have good games but also bad games. I'm gonna vote for my lineup from last year.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2020 23:33
|
|
|
Have some time to breathe, so I want to expound on the themes and my thoughts behind them a bit. Primarily, I wanted to do something a little different than last year. I think an auction sounds really cool, but no way would I reasonably do that at an appreciable scale, and certainly not by post. Drafting still seemed like the most efficient way to interact at a meta level. Running the draft back as is with different players would still be fun, but a little unexciting to me. I wanted everyone, including myself, to have a good time. I had the idea of stretching the players into making picks they otherwise may not have made, which transitioned into themed rounds. I didn't want to do the entire draft with themed rounds because I wanted to allow for some freedom to pick things that may not fit neatly into any category and also thinking of themes in the way that I envisioned was difficult. I settled on half and half. Looking at the scoring criteria for both drafts, I tried to include categories that did not necessarily overlap. The first draft was started almost as a joke, and I did not have an end goal in mind at the start. There are many different ways that we can evaluate games, and therefore collections, so it makes sense to try and encourage that within the scoring structure. I wanted to also represent this idea, having wildly different criteria and picks, with the theme rounds. From the start, I wanted to think about things that stretch the drafters in different directions that don't overlap. The restrictions (player count, rank, component, theme, and release date) I felt were on different enough axes that redundancy would have been incidental. The material for the themes did change a lot from idea to implementation. My original idea was to give a vague sense of an idea ('conflict') and require a justification for why that game applies. Ultimately, I did not trust that I could create themes that were interesting and strict enough to encourage a deviation from normal 'overall best' picks if I left it purely to justification. I was not interested in semantic arguments or resolving them. For that reason, I opted to move to something that could more easily be checked. This would serve as an effective limitation and also allow me to make more impartial judgments if needed. Gutter Owl did bring up a good point about the nature of the themed rounds combined with the snake style draft. Her suggestion was good and fair; I just did not want to either extend the draft or make it 2/3 themed. I opted to switch the themed rounds to the odd rounds. I felt that this was a decent compromise between my reservations in the previous sentence and her reservations about the parity and quality of picks at the ends of the snake. With the first round being themed, some strong games would still come off the table in that round. However, in my mind, it would also serve to level the overall strength of the games picked in the round and allow the caboose to have a combined more even pair of picks than someone potentially in the middle. Things like Gloomhaven, Spirit Island, Tigris & Euprates, and Root were games well praised picked first round last year and were available at the start of the second round this year. I was hoping that things like that being available for the caboose balanced out the concerns of pick parity while first rounders picked things like Argent and TI4 that went much later in the previous draft. Being able to swap out a theme pick with a later pick was an idea to inject a bit more 'game' into this event. Do you take a universally strong game that technically applies in for this theme? If so, do you stick with that and gamble losing theme votes or do you decrease the quality of a free pick to try and shore up that theme later? Do you stay true to yourself and go as hard as you can in the theme rounds and risk having access to overall stronger games? This is also why I tried to word themes in such a way that allowed and encouraged technically correct responses. The ability to swap out picks was also my compromise with the middle drafters in case both strong games and good theme games were gone already. In retrospect, I should have weighted the 3 scoring categories (overall, themes, mass appeal) equally to make this a more interesting decision. The themes themselves were ordered in a way that I thought would be interesting. I was trying to figure out how to word/structure at least two themes so I put those at the back. Again, my goals were to stretch this specific community into making picks they otherwise wouldn't and also to have categories that did not overlap. Here are my general thoughts about them specifically: 6 Players - One of the primary motivators for choosing a game on game night is player count. I generally think that 3 player is the best player count for the vast majority of games. What happens when you invite a few people, and they want to invite friends as well? Player count can quickly bloom. If I think that low player counts are best, I am interested in hearing about good games that play higher counts. I didn't want to restrict the pool too much by going into what I considered strict drafting/party game territory at 7+, and 5 players I felt wasn't restrictive enough given the expansion rule. That left me with 6. I specified that it didn't have to be good at six to eliminate extended arguments about what is/is not good at that player count. It seemed like a decent round to start things off as it allowed heavy favorites like FCM to still be chosen while freeing up some things like Gloomhaven. Not too free, not too restrictive. >300 Rank - Admittedly, this wasn't as much of a stretch as I would have liked with this group because of the specialized taste. I considered bumping to 500. Ultimately I stuck with 300 due to the first round hopefully freeing up some ranked picks and the family rule preventing some 2nd and revised editions. While taste in this group is more esoteric than the hobby at large, there are still plenty of favorites in the top ranks. I could have went to 500 or even 1000 and probably been fine, but I was looking at things after 500 and finding a lot of bleh games for myself. I want to restrict you, but not to the point of mediocrity. I opted to put this second to further delay some of the heavy hitters. Dice - Dice are a polar subject in games. Some people hate them, some people want to roll 20 of them. This is a group that mostly does not care for dice, so I thought it would be interesting to see what you could pull out for games that did use them. I wanted to encourage mentioning and learning about games that used dice in creative ways, so I worded it to include games that have dice but don't roll them. I expected a lot of war games to go this round, but honestly they did not. This was the third round by default, as I needed more time to think about how to word the last two themes. License - I think that it is fair to say that a game's theme can dictate how much the game is viewed, bought, and played. We attach ourselves to a lot of media because we want to continue to live in familiar worlds and experience familiar characters. How often do games use existing worlds to bring attention to good quality rather than using them as a crutch to sell mediocre game play? This is a question that I find interesting to explore with a group whose eye is as critical as this. I also think it is good to think about because many new players can be brought into the hobby if they are interested in the theme. I originally wanted to allow things like Cthulhu and Sherlock Holmes to be allowed, but some questions about things based on Arthurian legends made me question how consistently I could apply the rule, so I stuck with licensed properties. I excluded board game properties because only board gamers care about board game worlds, which wasn't quite the question I was trying to ask. I agree that maybe this was a bit difficult for being round 7, but only 4ish games that would have qualified were picked up until this point. I felt that the pool of games available wasn't severely restricted, and potentially even more open than we realized with reskinned games. I would have been okay with something like say D&D, but collectively you decided not to go in that direction. I am shook that Exceed wasn't picked here. >2016 Release - Again, this is an activity aimed to entertain this specific community. A common sentiment is that we have passed the best ages of board game releases. However, new things still excite us, right? I toyed with the date, originally wanting to go back to 2010/11, and even toyed with going under 2007. Because of the common sentiment, time it took me to decide exactly which year, and its position at the end of the draft, I decided that newer games would be a decent way to end. I opted not to do things like mechanics (worker placement, DoaM, economic, etc) because that felt boring to me. 5 themes, mostly unique axes, and asked questions I mostly found interesting. I was content with that. Why slow roll the reveals? Part of it was to give myself time to word some things. Part of it was to start the draft sooner rather than later. Part of it was I liked seeing the reactions when they were announced. I also wanted to be entertained, after all. For fun, some themes I decided not to use: Games that modeled conflict - didn't want to deal with semantics arguments Games with wooden components - realized that most games have wood somewhere, so would have been completely free round Games designed by designers who were not white men - hard to fact check, didn't want to introduce identity discussions Games funded by kickstarter - ultimately didn't seem interesting to me and also maybe more work to fact check than I would like Games with solo modes - didn't feel like checking every rulebook or arguing that most coop games are solo games Games with unique art/mechanics/presentation - how is unique defined? Games non-hobbyists would enjoy - also hard to define, so rolled this up into a scoring condition that you subjectively vote upon
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 01:05
|
|
|
Sorry for the double post, but I want to get this over with because I don't feel comfortable right now. code:Themes - blackmongoose Wide Range - Doctor Draft Winner - Dancer I was going to write about the specific feedback that I received and how I planned to implement it in the future. I am sapped of my desire to do because of said discomfort up top. Instead, I want to take a moment to explain why I am mentioning my discomfort as well as why I take pause at the idea of running another. quote:Enter Suddenly Susan. Call me thin skinned, projecting, or whatever. I'm not going to deal with someone feeling so upset about a completely elective, for entertainment event that they either alt post at me or ask a friend to do it. It may be small of me to bring this up here but gently caress it shine a spot light on lovely behavior. I will present what I have found and let you draw your own conclusions. At the very least, ketchup and Susan are going to be blocked on SA/Discord and absolutely will not allow either in any game i host going forward. I will probably host again once I block and take a year to distance myself. Sorry for the damper on an otherwise entertaining event. I'm tired. Shadow225 fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Aug 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 02:52
|
|
|
That's a bigger wtf than the very entertaining Zendo troll. What the gently caress people. Way to ruin a fun thing, jfc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 03:04
|
|
|
The gently caress. Well, I had a blast anyway, and will happily watch next time because gah push your luck makes me anxious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 03:04
|
|
|
big is cool for running this and goons being goons sucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 03:18
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:big is cool for running this and goons being goons sucks. Is it really goons being goons if I've only come across two sock puppets in like ten years here? Otherwise, yes, big props to big for running and, uh, don't do the other thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 03:21
|
|
|
Much appreciated for another great year Big I'll happily turn over the championship belt to Dancer, they had a very good draft (until I take it back next year)
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 03:26
|
|
|
Memnaelar posted:Is it really goons being goons if I've only come across two sock puppets in like ten years here? You can always count on someone to exhibit bad and weird behavior in general when goons do anything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 03:27
|
|
|
The gently caress? All my posts were meant to be good natured. I do know Ketchup and our tastes tend to align and at least when it comes to Terraforming Mars off of the goon consensus. If my posts hurt anyone’s feeling I am sorry, that was not my intention. I just happen to really like drafts and board games so this is the only time I really feel like I have something useful to contribute. I genuinely think that the draft is great, and while I disagreed with how the themes were implemented I do think forcing unusual choices is a great idea. I guess I’ll go back to lurking. I do want to make anyone genuinely feel bad. I just wanted to have some fun making light hearted jabs (at least that was my intention) at a board game draft.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 03:33
|
|
|
SS and I have never hidden that we know each other in real life. We’ve played board games with at least a dozen goons at gencons. In fact SS and I met on SA over a decade ago when he posted about board games and we found out we were local. I admit I more or less checked out of this draft after the rules got super long and dominion went #1 in a 6 player themed round but I made all my picks in good faith even though I didn’t explain most of them. We have absolutely texted each other grousing about picks/the rules in this draft, but that’s about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 03:59
|
|
|
Try being more positive and encouraging when you trash talk. There's a tone thing, and if it just seems like you're making GBS threads all over something you come across super unpleasant. I like to point out silliness but also kinda mocking myself for calling it out. I've deleted a bunch of posts, haha, that I just wasn't a hundred percent that would for sure be read as goofy instead of mean-spirited. I would have liked to see more playfulness and engagement from ketchup but otherwise this was overall a ton of fun. I even said in my votes that I would have liked more restrictions on the themes so finding loopholes and end-arounds was even more ridiculous. The whole point was the arguing, and the reactions, and the ability to laugh at you guys for possibly not realizing I genuinely love playing Cosmic if you can get a group that's into it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 04:36
|
|
|
Oh we really, really could tell you enjoy cosmic, don't worry about that. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 04:38
|
|
|
Casnorf posted:I would have liked to see more playfulness and engagement from ketchup 100% legit and I apologize.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 04:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 22:53 |
|
|
Liking things is cool and good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2020 04:51
|
|